we begin this afternoon's programs. to remind you once again to make room for those who might be coming late, if you could move to the center that would be greatly appreciated, and also be sure to turn off your cell phones. we don't want to interrupt our speakers. in your registration bag there is a registration flyer for the values voters summit 2012 on septembers 14-16. >> now if you register this weekend and turn in your form at the registration counter upstairs, we will give you zhrr 50 off next year's price. but you must enter this weekend and turn in the form to the registration desk upstairs. this discount is not valid if you mail it in. you want to do it before you leave. get your pact with michele bachmann, bobby jindal and

others. you are doing just a great job. i really want to thank you for being gracious to our guests, the media. thank you for covering this. we thank you so much for being respectful as you cover this event. it is funny. there is a new movement called occupy wall street. this past weekend over 700 arrests occurred. many in the media say they are patriots, but thousands of values voters say we are not so sure about that. remember my five words. what are they? don't be the weird one. all right. [laughter] >> our first speaker this afternoon is a man who is never caught without a copy of the constitution in his coat pocket. he worked in the iowa senate to successfully eliminate the inheritance tax, to enforce

work place drug testing, enforcing parental rights, including parental notification of abortion and tax cuts for iowa voters. he represents iowa's fifth district. he is also a member of the house judiciary committee, where he sits on the constitution subcommittee and the immigration subcommittee. and when f.r.c. action launched its bus tour throughout iowa to mobilize values voters, he was extremely helpful and very supportive and participated greatly in this outreach. welcome to the podium u.s. representative steve king. [applause]

>> thank you all very, very much. that is a wonderful welcome. it's a fantastic privilege to have an opportunity to be here today in any capacity. already in just walking around the hotel, you have recharged my faith and belief in america. the things that have made this a great, great country also. i have been asked to speak about the marriage issue and jew additional retention in iowa. i would start out this way, and that is that marriage is -- first of all, it is a sacred relationship. it is established by god. [applause] all of our human experience points to marriage as being the essential foundation stone to civilization. we pour through marriage all of our values. a man and woman joined together in holy matrimony put together with them the values of their faith, the cultural values, the

religious ethic, work ethic, cultural ethic, the foods we eat and the things we do for recreation, all of the things we found most precious that championship from their parents they do their best through marriage to pour through their children that god blesses them with. marriage is under assault today, loiming. it is under assault even though it is a sacrament. they are assaulting it, and they are doing so not because there is an ulterior value, but because it is. when nancy pelosi became the speaker of the house, every year we had to brick up the language that came up. as cris smith said so well, we won the debate, but we lost the vote. i looked across to the other side, and the pro abortion

people over there that -- they were cheering, clapping, jumpeding up and down and hug can't each other. i stood and looked across there and thought how can anyone have a value that cause them to act like they have won a conference championship when they have compelled americans to take their taxpayer dollars and fund abortions in foreign lands. i thought about it a long time and a few days later it came through. they weren't cheering balls they were using money for abortions against -- in foreign lands. they are cheering because they had attacked our values. they attack it because they know it is precious to us. they have to plow through marriage to get where they are going, and we have to hold marriage together to preserve this article of faith, because it is the foundation stone of the unchallenged greatest nation in the world and in all of western civilization.

[applause] and to give you a little bit of encouragement. they weren't irgnornt about this a hundred years ago. i looked up a case, it was maynard v. hill. they is said -- said it was the foundation of society. supreme court, 1888. well, 110 years later i found myself in the iowa senate and our iowa marriage laws were under risk from the litigation that started in hawaii and sweeping across the land. many of you remember those battles that we had.

>> well hear argument first this morning, maples versus thomas -- >> we are having some technical problems with our signal from the values voter summit. we are working on the problem and hope to have it resolved shortly.

>> again, woven countered some technical problems with our coverage this afternoon of the values voter summit in washington. we hope to have it resolved shortly. we were taping it just as well, so we will have it later in the program schedule. in the meantime we are going to bring you some of the thoughts and news from this morning's "washington journal." post to our facebook page. mr. constantine is the author of open quote price list: bringing down the visa and mastercard cartel." bank of america said recently that they would charge $5 a

month for the use of debit cards. they argued they were forced to make that change because of regulations that alter the economics of the card. other banks agreed. jamie time and put the effect of the regulation this way. if you are a restaurant that cannot charge for the soda, you will charge more for the burger. merely an attempt to rationalize and ought to stay one of the largest illegal transfers of wealth from consumers to banks in american history. deborah carr is developed by banks for paper checks. the bank saves money. in the 1980's, these a calculated the savings --

>> "usa today," the lead editorial, "what about capitalism do they not get"?

host: we want to get your reaction to bank fees this morning. john, good morning. >> as far as banks charging fees, they shouldn't be allowed to do that. nopoly. lotteries and casinos are money drains on the society.

we need to eliminate them in order to keep going. thank you. >> pa., gregory, you are on "washington journal." >> i think that those fees are really unnecessary. considering how much money we have put into these banks, the government should have a say in what they're doing. it is not just an option to leave the bank. >> why not? >> too many people leave? we have a problem with that bank again. it is failing because the ceo is a bonehead. so, we have to tell them, we cannot do this. they need bank of america. >> helen, good morning.

>> i have been a customer with bank of america for 25 years. i banked with them because they are very convenient and i have direct deposit from my employer. i do not want to be messing around with my paycheck. but i have been nickeled and a dime to for 25 years. this is the last straw. finally saying -- enough, you cannot take more from us. when i got the mortgage, a loan officer made a point of deducting it directly from a checking account. i said that that is no problem, by the first for the fifth. she said she did do it by the tent. i have looked at my mortgage statement -- they were charging $40 in late fees every month because they automatically detected because of earlier.

it is these little things, the individual and the public. this, we cannot deal with more deals from the banks. >> are you going to be switching your bank? >> my employer laid off a lot of staff that does the paper work, so to say? i am afraid that if i switched, it would mess up my direct deposit. i need my paycheck. >> a couple -- host: a couple of facebook comments. this one from jim --

white this is from arnold -- -- host: this is from arnold -- host: thomas -- host: the next call comes from mississippi. caller: good morning. i love c-span. i think it is ridiculous that the banks are now charging the poor $5. we bailed them out one time. they have taken our money and put it somewhere to gain interest. they made a bad investment and we have to bail them out again. it is ridiculous. they are not loaning money to people who are trying to keep america afloat by keeping them

in houses. george bh took us to war and put came int office,e had rplus of m. c-span.org website, september job figures released each morning. it provides a snapshot. last month the b.l.s. reported that the unemployment rate stays the same. today's report is released at 8:30 eastern time. we will bring that to you as soon as we get it at 8:30. and nench iler win writes this morning in the "washington post" that the job outlook may cure the economy.

a report on the job market due out friday morning should give a better sense of which perception is right and whether the u.s. economy is truly recovering. the markets are clearly indicating that a recession or something very close to it is either imminent or under way. the high prices that investors are willing to pay for safe assets such as treasury bonds and the steep declines in the stock market show something. the picture is painted of a benign growth, limping along slowly but consistently. business activity as expanded in the manufacturing and services sector according to key surveys released this week for the institute of supply management. but thothe signs won't mean much if the job market doesn't soon improve, and the latest figures to be released at 8:30

this morning will tell us how we fared last month. that is in the "washington post." back to your calls on bank fees. from sullivan, maine, is john on our independent line. john, good morning. caller: good morning. i would like to draw the comparison between the bank fees and the taxes to government. there's a real similarity in that one would approve or disapprove of them depending upon the perceived value received for the money spent. i can easily see how banks have run us into debt from their c.d.o.'s and other structured investment vehicles, and we can see how the u.s. government has run us into debt and wants us now to pay the $5 bank fee to them in the form of additional tax revenues. so both are quite similar, and

perception is it we are not getting full value for our money from either of thace entities. thank you. host: thanks for calling in. from the "new york post," get off the stump from boehner. house speaker john boehner ripped president obama for throwing in the towel. nothing has disappointed me more than over the last five weeks seeing the president give up on leading and campaigning. i have reached out to the president, yet the president some 14 months before the lexi throws in the towel. we are legislating. he is campaigning. in an article in the "new york post" right next to it. bam gets behind wall street protestors. president obama jumped into the tent with wall street protestors yesterday, sharing their frustration with the financial system he slammed for its immoral and reckless practices that brought on the

economic crisis. "i think it expresses the frustrations of the american people, that the american people feel." obama said as a white house press conference yesterday when asked about the wall street protests that started in lower manhattan a few weeks ago and spread to other cities. and finally this article in the post. low and behold, obama poll numbers. a record high number of voters disapproved of what he is doing. his disapproval rating hit 55% in an all time loan in a university poll. 64% disapprove of how he is handling the economy, and americans are pessimistic about him being able to turn it around. back to your calls. laster is on our republican line. hi, lester. caller: how, how are you doing? host: good.

caller: it is to the point where big corporate america is the first one to hit the welfare office. we have to bail them out over and over. we have enough people to support. we don't need to support the banking institutes. they started waving the fees, and they don't charge me anything for it. i figured out what it cost me to cash my checks. it is ridiculous. i stick with sun trust. they waive all my fees and do a better job at it. i know it is inconvenient, but if enough people do it, it only takes a few to get their attention. host: this tweet there dr. dunk. if people had any sense, they would use checks for all purchases, give banks some of their own medicine. next call on bank fees comes from albany, new york. tim on our independent line.

hi, tim. caller: how are you doing, sir? good morning to you. as a young man, i have kind of dug myself into a huge hole, but i have to tell you, bank of america was right there and kept handing me the shovel. so i kind of feel that banks prey on the young and inexperienced and poor with all these hidden fees. they, like everyone else has spoken to, the wealth transfer in this country has been horrible. it is rough for the younger generation. that is pretty much what i have to say. say, is what i have to telling my own experience. host: mark, republican line. we are talking about bank fees. but you think? caller: -- what do you think?

caller: banks are businesses. you do not have to like it. at the same time, the fees that we have are from dick durbin. where are you? there has got to be a sense of coming between those. host: this is from the c-span website. the republican congressional leadership is gathering in washington.

>> "washington journal" live every morning at 7:00 a.m. and 9 we will go live now back to the values boater summit with taxes gov. rick perry. -- texas gov. rick perry. >> they're pointing the finger and employers under the guise of fairness. when they are under phrases like "fair share," you just know that they are, once again, playing fast and furious with the truth. the truth is you can are rev up the engine of economic growth by keeping higher taxes on job creators. you cannot spread success by

punishing and. you cannot unite our country by dividing it. the answer to our troubles lives in a positive, optimistic vision with policies rooted in american exceptional is in. american exceptional ism is it the product of freedom. there is nothing new troubling our nation today that cannot be solved by the rebirth of a freedom. nothing. [applause] i happen to believe in this great country of ours. i will leave in the capacity of our people to create prosperity through private ingenuity. i believe in the values of the american people. americans know anything worth achieving in life requires rework, not government handouts. in this present generation of

americans, they're not looking for government to lead the way. they want america to get out of the way so that they can make the most of the freedom for their families. you cannot live a free cannot find a job. you cannot live free if you inherit $46,000 bills in the federal debt. you cannot live free when the government gets between you and your doctor. i believe it is time to revive their freedom for our families and employers. if we're going to get entrepreneurs and small businesses on the map again, we need to freeze all the pending federal regulations out there for the next six months. [applause] we need to cut taxes for families and employers because the only kind of stimulus that

will work is the kind that puts lamar -- more money in your pockey. -- pocket. we need to kill the bureaucratic job-killing nightmare known as obamacare. [applause] there are three pillars that serve as the foundation of our country. a strong economy, strong families, and a strong military. in my own state, we have created 40% of all american jobs since june 2009. our success is based on four rather simple principles. one is do not spend all the money. two is keep the taxes low. three is provide a fair and predictable regulatory climate. four is stop the frivolous lawsuits. they kill jobs. [applause]

we passed the most sweeping tort reform in the nation, which includes a new a loser-pay law in the state of taxes. -- state of texas. at the same time that the fed chairman warns that the recovery is close the faltering, just yesterday the texas comptroller office says our revenues have a rebound to pre-recession levels. [applause] our august home sales rose. our employment expanded. our exports increased. manufacturing activity started climbing again. yet, there was president obama standing in front of the white house press corps doubling down

on the same failed strategy that worsened our economic crisis and double their deficits. it just goes to show you that those blinded by tax and spend big government ideology will never see the truth. every day but is clear for the u.s. economy to grow and succeed that we need new leadership. [applause] president obama as commitment to the same old pro-tax, a pro- government policy has bel air nation. america needs a new leader with a proven record of job creation and sound economic policies. is not immune to the

socio-economic environment, but recent reports show that low, flat, bear taxes with a reasonable regulations restrain government spending is all a proven recipe for job creation. the key to prosperity of his liberty. -- is liberty. the larger the government borrows, the smaller our circle of freedom. the basic governance is family. as a conservative, i believe with all my heart that the government closest to the people is the best for the people. there should not be a single policy coming out of washington, d.c., that interferes with decisions best made by the family. [applause]

i'm proud to be the son of farmers. where i grew up, we did not have much in the way of material goods, but we were sure rich in spirit, abundant in face, devoted to family. happiness was not a product of what we had. it was what we believed. we believed we were blessed to live in the freest nation on this earth. we were fortunate to grow up where there was a strong sense of community, that there were still to do we cannot achieve in the land of the free in the home of the brave. -- that there was nothing we could not achieve. my country school where i grew up and graduated had a mano, "no dream too tall for a school so small."

there are millions of americans that are born into less than ideal circumstances. maybe they were born into poverty, born without a parent. as a society, we must stand for the principle that every life is worth living regardless of circumstance. [applause] in america, it is not where you come from that matters, but where you're going. as americans, we must affirm the value of life not just in our declaration of independence but in the ways that we live. for some candidates, a pro-life is an election year slogan to follow the prevailing political wind. to me, it is about the absolute principle that every human being

is entitled to life. all human life, all human life, is made in the image of our creator. [applause] every innocent life must be protected, from the most frail, elderly, to the most vulnerable who are on born. -- unborn. as governor, i have consistently worked on pro-life such as parental consent, a ban on third trimester abortions. i am proud to fight for and to sign a budget that defunded planned parenthood in texas. [applause]

thank you. thank you. our obligation is not only to protect life and in still freedom on future generations, but also to instill character. young americans must never be taught about rights without also learning about responsibilities. we must not proclaim their responsibilities of a free society and ignore the responsibilities of a free individual. we must never mistake liberty for a license. one is a right and the other leads to bondage.

for more than a generation, our culture has emphasize the message of self indulgence at the extent of stovall obligation -- social obligation. we have reached the consequences in broken families, the cycle of incarceration that joins young man with their fathers behind bars. the fabric of our society is not government or individual freedom, but the family. the demise of the family is the demise of any great society. [applause] this great country of ours has never been steered off course when we advocated policies to promote strong families. neither can it be preserved

without an unwavering commitment to our national security. as americans, we are blessed to have the greatest fighting force for freedom in this entire world, our men and women of the united states military. some people say you cannot find heroes in the morning. are they ever wrong? we have heroes today. they are fighting in the mountains of afghanistan, in the sands of iraq, on covert missions places we do not know about to destroy the enemies of this country.

they put their lives on the line every day so that we do not have to. over the years, i have been so honored to meet a great number of those american heroes as i travel to the outposts and i have signed letters to their loved ones who have made the ultimate sacrifice. i consider myself so unfortunate to have been able to wear the uniform of our country. and that informs my perspective about our defense policies. i believe we must never put the military on the chopping block as a part of some political harsh fray.

never. [applause] the question we must ask is not what we can afford to spend on our military but what it costs to remain secure and free. air real key component to keeping america secure is keeping israel secure. [applause] we can never forget that it was israel that took up the nuclear capabilities. israel is our ally, our friend.

and i am president of the united states, america will again stand with our friends. [applause] we will not compromise when it comes to our national security, and that is true when it comes to defense spending and when it comes to border security. the me tell you this about border security. i have lived and breathed it this issue for over a decade as a border governor. i have signed budgets with $400 million of state security operations along the border. i have dealt with the carnage dealing with the traffic of

weapons and people. i know the failures of our border policy. we should not provide amnesty to those who break the laws to come into this country. are required a photo id to votes in order to protect the integrity of our elections. [applause] for the obvious security reasons, i vetoed legislation to give drivers licenses to illegal aliens. there is no homeland security without border security. let me repeat that. there is no security without border security. make no mistake about it. what we're seeing south of our border is nothing short of their war being waged by these narco-

terrorists who represents a clear and present danger to our country, spreading violence to american cities, paddling poison. in the face of this threat, we should not take any options off the table including security operations in cooperation with the mexican government as we did with colombia. you cannot have liberty, you cannot have opportunity, you cannot have prosperity without security. the issue before our leaders of both parties is secured a better future for all americans. economic security is a topic of discussion that millions of dinner tables all across this country of ours. i have been the great privilege

traveling across this country and i have listened and they are not under any illusions about the current state of our country. they have never mistaken hope for a handout because they want to earn their keep. they're not looking for soaring speeches but common sense solutions. they know our first order of business to getting america working again is sending our current president to the private sector. [applause] like all of you, i believe america is exceptional. to paraphrase abraham lincoln and ronald reagan, "america

remains the last, best hope of mankind." we can never forget that the exceptionalism can be traced back to our founding fathers. the framers of our constitution with the first in history to declare that all men are created equal, endowed by their creators with certain unalienable rights, the hand of a province that has guided america throughout our history from those first colonists to arrive in the new world to the courage of george washington during those darkest hours of valley forge to the defeat of tyranny during two world wars in the cold war. time and time again, america has

been the source of light in a world beset by darkness. like a light house perched on the shore, we have provided a safe harbor to those who have been a drift. we can still be the country we aspire to, a source of light and hope to all who live here and come here. we can rebuild on the solid foundation of truth. we can restore hope at home while projecting our values abroad. we can be the freest and most prosperous people to ever occupy if we remain one

country under god. god bless you. [applause] ♪ >> more live coverage coming up from the values of voter summit here on c-span. we have more road to the white house coming up this holiday weekend all of it from new hampshire. sunday, minnesota congresswoman michele bachmann will be at the town hall meeting in walton burdick, in hampshire. -- moutlonborough, n.h.

jon huntsman will be speaking about foreign-policy in hooks set, new hampshire. then it will be former gov. mitt romney in a town hall meeting in hopkinton. that we live monday at 6:15 p.m. eastern. now, back to the values voter summit. herman cain and newt gingrich both coming up. lots more live here on c-span. >> we have three of the brightest stars from the new media world with us today. i would like to introduce ed morrissey. [applause] he writes at hotair.com and hosts an internet talk show. he began as an independent

blogger. he writes a regular column and co-hosts a twin cities program on the northern alliance radio network. his son, daughter 9jin law, and has 2 grandkids. next is kathryn jean lopez, the current editor in large for the national review online. she is an award winning journalist. she is also in a nationally syndicated columnist and is known as k-lo.

lastly, joe carter, the editor of first things, and an adjunct professor. he served as a managing editor for the east texas tribune and started the evangelical outpost. he worked for mike huckabee for president and was my predecessor. he is the co-author of "how to argue like jesus." [applause] all of you are in the cat-bird seat within the new media, but

from your standpoint, does the media, rather new or old, get the values voter? >> i'll start. do they get them? the mainstream media doesn't. either whichdon't is why conferences like this are so important which is why you can bring people together to see the exchange of ideas and get to what drives you, what common thread the there are among the different varieties of conservatives in the political scene today. fiscal, social, different conservatives have things in common.

individual rights and liberties, the core values that informed that, and all those things come from a sense of shared experience in the conservative movement. sometimes i think we can do a better job of appreciateing , te nuances as well. >> in bits and pieces, sometimes. conferences like this are helpful. part of it is telling your story and not just telling your story from here or your blog, which is important, but being a part of the cultural mix. i'm willing to bet that most

people do not watch the show .grey's anatomy" on thursday's there's another show on after it called "private practice" and that one is about the fertility clinic. it's not coming from a pro-life point of view. the creator of both shows is on the board of neral in california. trying tose they're find a good story lines and a franklin and the experiences of themselves and their friends, every once in awhile you will see little windows. the first show of "grey's" this season, one of the doctors had

an abortion. but you see how it is destroying her marriage. you see how an older doctor on "private practice" had an abortion and is now getting on in years and now really wants a child and is regretting her choice. it is not typically coming from a pro-life agenda, but when you hear the creator of the show talk about how the put stories together, the people in the room to make a difference. even though she is coming from that point of view, a shi'ahs people who are creative and want to be a screen writer, they help make these stories at the end of the day. it is important in telling our story is not to just see in our own safe places, but to encourage people to engage in the culture.

>> one of the reasons they do not get it is because we do not get it ourselves. we a people visit for the most radically progress of the agenda, gay marriage, and still called a conservative. what does that mean? that is just a liberal that likes tax cuts. [laughter] is the conservative movement portrays itself as this and the outside world says we should move to that type of conservatism. the outside world does not understand we support the principles that we do. we narrowed down to social conservatives would should be redundant. you cannot be conservative without being concerned about

social issues. [applause] in what ways do you think the media actually affects public perception of social issues? what way does the public purse of -- affect the perception? >> it is a vicious cycle. gay marriages normal out there. if this is what my friends and family think, maybe i should think that, too. then it comes back with a bump in approval ratings so that the media portrays that. the cycle discontinues and it is what the media has created because we are free to stand up and say this is not what we believe our stand for, and we will not let the media control the damage of what america

stands for. -- control the image. >> one of my friends will not accept those norms are the ways that the media bring the the issues that are teaching our families desperately -- our families differently, goign to the theme ofthis panel. the media plays a role, but here is the value of alternative media. we have to know who we are and be confident in that and not let the mainstream media that is saying something different get us down. we have to remain a rigorous. one of the reasons that the

national review, which was founded by bill buckley, who not only established an alternative medium but he was on a pbs every week, the longest running public affairs program. he was telling a story to conservatives, the conf usionist, trying to figure out the common definition in the right wing and where we can work together to end the cold war. he and margaret thatcher, ronald reagan, and all those heroes instrumental in. as we're trying to combat whenever mainstream message out there that we are combating, we

have to make sure we avellino what is that we believe and knowing what you're talking about, getting your facts right, and being deeply rooted would be the confidence. rush limbaugh is not famous because he is a good talker, but he knows what he is talking about. he can talk about it for three hours and be entertaining on any given day. that is what you want to be well to do in whatever it is that you were doing, whatever your role is in the conservative pro- alive, pro-family movement. know what you were talking about and be a happy warrior in doing so. >> it is amazing when you look back 15-20 years ago and you look at the media landscape now and then. we can even go back 30 years.

this was in my lifetime. you got news through a dead tree delivery on your porch step or from one of three, count them 3, sources on your television. maybe a local community affairs radio program that had a couple of people who were about this far apart politically debating the issues of the day. things have changed a lot. we need to recall that this is a blessing. as the media has become more democratized and the cost of publishing has come down to zero, it is much easier for social conservatives and really everyone to tell their own story and frame their own story. this is an access we did not have 30 years ago. maybe we did not have as much

need for 30 years ago, but we did not have that ability. we have the ability now. it is important to make sure that we are leveraging that in order to tell our story properly. and accurately and definitively. i think that actually counters some of the issues we have had with the media molding the message. when it comes down to it, editors at different outlets, regardless of whether they are newspapers, magazines, broadcast and entertainment, films, of it is the people who own the channel as to which stories to tell. every single one of you can be your own broadcast channel coming your own editor. did you tell your story is coming will balance out the fact that the media has. there are plenty more of us that can tell those stories. >> along those lines, in the

1960's marshall mcluhan coined it the phrase, "the medium is the message." the way we communicate is a message in itself. what way do you think the internet has affected the way we talk about public policy in? >> twitter attention span. one thing that is important is all the social media and new media experts say you have to tailor your message for whatever form you on. if you are on twitter, you have to get your message in 140 characters. it does create a creative

possibilities for people as well. not to summit in broken record, but the important thing when we're doing these things is to make sure that we are still keeping the big picture in mind as we are treating, facebooking, and doing deliberative thinking, and not getting caught up in things. phil bennett has a new book out called "the book of man," with stories about her wrote men and prayers for good men, but he has an entire chapter on reflection and prayer. how counter-cultural is that as we are tweeting our lives away? the national review is always

looking at what the new alternative option is and tried to make sure we're getting our message out loud when -- out that way but always not watering down at the end of the day what your mission and purpose is. while you are tweeting and on facebook, keep in mind what your mission is. you are not doing it just to hit refresh or tweet. >> the internet as a medium is like a teenage girl. when my daughter was young, whenever was important right that was the most important thing in the world and five minutes later it was forgotten. when steve jobs died of today, everyone had to say something about him.

two days from now or two weeks from now, not everyone will be concerned. we should be concerned with the internal perspective as christians. the medium of the internet compounds the problem that started with tv and newspapers. news makes us down because it does not connected into a broader narrative. to some and give you a newspaper dated two weeks ago, you would not want to read it because it is old news. >> if i get the morning paper a few hours later, i do not bother reading in. >> if i do not read it in the morning, it is considered old news and you move on. what we need to do is try to fit

this in with the broader narrative. we can try to fix things in perspective and make it to what matters today. we undermine conservative is someone would focus on what is important right now -- undermine conservativeism when we focus on right now. >> i think it has transformed the consumer. because i am an old fogey, i will bring you back 30 years. for most of us, there was only one newspaper in town and you had three broadcast networks to choose from to get your news. now you have thousands, tens of thousands about what's across the country in your communities,

and you are now able to be wise consumers of the news. i do not mean "the new york times." there are good writers there, there are good writers of "the washington post." being wise means picking and choosing through the things that are truthful. knowing what your sources are and being wise about what you are reading and where does your getting your informations means doing your homework. that is because we have, again, a blessing of abundance. we have a country that produces this kind of abundance. we have an abundance of information sources. we now have the ability where we did not have it 25-30 years ago to be wise consumers in choose

what sources we're going to look up that is almost like a smorgasbord. this particular recorder is really good, jake at abc, it is usually accurate, timely, and he challenges everyone on what is that they're trying to say. >> have the emergence of a conservative out with some -- conservative outlets eliminated bias? >> "the new york times" and "the washington post" should come out of the closet. media bias has not been eliminated. having these alternative outlets in this populist approach were

in a locality you can be challenging the big guys and the local paper. the franklin center and others provide local alternatives in terms of setting up an internet web site that will counter and provide an alternative to the local paper. when ed mentioned jake tapper, media bias has not been eliminated, but sometimes "the new york times," quoted the washington post," etc. really do run fair stories or tell stories that really do happen to be true. there may be a sentence or phrase here and there that you take issue, but if you see a reporter, an editor, or a paper in general being fair to religious people, conservatives,

when everett is -- whatever it is, thank them. it's worth thanking them. having it an e-mail address publicly by my byline, generally usually only send me that they do not like what we're saying. that is not what they say. i cannot say it on c-span or at a conservative family forum. people rarely say thank you. if you like a pastor's a sermon on sunday, you should tell him because other people probably thought so but did not say anything. i think that is particularly important for us to establish relationships with people in the mainstream media as conservatives, activists, and people in the community. do not treat the media as if is

an enemy. will they sometimes be hostile? yes. if you show a particular reporter, editor, or the news room that you are a human being with an alternative world view, which a lot of people happen to share, a bank makes a difference. can work it out if we do not have the talent. >> i do not think we're at a point where it is balancing, but we have to be concerned about the conservative bias. a bias towards activism and towards a particular agenda. because they need a big tent for elections, they blend out all the perspectives. libertarianism and conservative islam should not be treated as equal in certain -- conservativism should not be

treated as equal. we should think for ourselves critically about what we want to get out of it. >> he will never eliminate media bias. the more that we have a mainstream conservative outlets, you will not eliminate bias there either. media outlets are run by people who have to make editorial decisions, and it those biases informed them. it is just people being human. that is why it is important to have a whole range of courses and be very judicious about knowing to these sources are, what their reliability is, and it is incumbent upon us to know that. >> not everyone here has the platform that you guys do to speak from. average values

voter or social conservatives do to further the movement with what they have available? what are some practical things they can help to do further the movement? >> the biggest most important thing is our approach. we should remember that beauty testifies to truth. if we do not present them in an attractive way and that seems beautiful, it will not be effective. our model for this should be the greatest broadcaster in history, paul harvey. he did more of the conservative movement than 10 other broadcasters in history. it is hard to imagine the reagan revolution without paul harvey. he presented a winsome approach. he just presented to

conservative principles as a way of life and a vision of america. if we were able to do that and had 1000 people that acted like paul harvey, we could transform america. >> what you said is so when portman. we have to be welcoming. coming from a particular point of view and believing things we will not give on, do you actually want to listen to what you're saying? you want to make sure that you can tolerate it and like the sound of your own voice, when you were saying, the words rang using. are you being loving in the course of what you are saying and the battle, so to speak? are you attracting people to things that are good and beautiful and that which motivates you in your daily life? in addition to being on facebook for twitter, or whatever it is

you do to communicate with your local groups, also making use if you see that joe carter has written a great article, use it as a point of discussion with a group, or if there is a good program on a vandalism in this new pbs series on catholicism -- a program on evagalism. this priest is talking about it, it looks beautiful, you do not have to agree with everything he says. if you agree, by the dvd and showed around town. if there is a good laura ingraham interview on bill o'reilly, use that as a discussion point.

not that i am that much of a suck up. we do not have to reinvent the wheel. that is important for conservatives. there are groups around town and when you were the new guy coming year should make use of those resources. as a national community, we should make use of the resources already out there when we are doing our own work in communities, on facebook, or whatever. >> i think you should listen to laura ingraham every day. [applause] i am that much of a suck up, actually. the best thing that you can do is tell your story. you know your story, you can tell at best. telecom a positive point of view. if you're comfortable with small group schering in your community, do that. if it is facebook, do that. if you feel comfortable writing in blogged, do that.

it you feel comfortable getting involved in media as a profession, do that. i am one of the very fortunate people here who led a completely different career eight years ago. i just followed where i felt i was being led and it has opened many doors for me. i am very privileged to be able to be on this platform. in large part, it is because the people like you who have read me, retweeted me, email my stories around, and i deeply appreciate that. all of us ideas and the lord gives us all gifts so we can share them to make the world better. there are a tremendous amount of stories here that would inspire others to action, so tell your stories in a way that feels comfortable to you. i guarantee you that, as a

movement, we can change the world by doing that. [applause] >> i think that is great advice. you can find all these guys on line. joe carter is that -- at firstthings.com national review.com and hotair.com. thank our guests. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] >> with all the talk about warren -- laura inghraham, perhaps you'd like to meet her. she is the most listened to woman in a political talk radio in the united states. "the loiret in rome -- "the laura ingraham show" has legions of listeners.

she is a regular box contributor. she is the number one "the new york times" author of 5 books. the new book, "of thee i zing." ladies and gentlemen, please welcome our very special guest to the values voter summit, laura ingraham. [applause] [applause] >> how you guys doin? hey, guys. there are no horns out there. scary. great to be here. thank you for having me. thank you to everyone who made this incredible time so special

pride think everyone who is here from out of town, which means you are for real america. as a welcome to washington, d.c. i like to give news reports. i know you are on your phones and stuff. i have a report from the protests. ok. are you ready? i had a chance to mingle down on wall street, taking my life in my own hands. this is a very energized group that the protests, very excited, very into their own moment right now. a bit unwashed. the celebrated film maker michael moore was down there. this is a cold audience. you have to give him credit. he is an incredible filmmaker. he says what he believes.

it's a friday, so i'm trying to be terrible. you should have seen the tourists lined up around michael moore. -- half of them mistook him for the freedom tower. half thought they were watching the macy's thanksgiving day parade. he did not get michele's message, "let's move." he is excited because the president is going on the offensive. for a liberal, it has been a tough couple of years. he is so excited that he actually watched his baseball cap. you know it is bad when the president's proper rating is lower than that of the protesters. the movement is spreading. how many of you liked the tea

party? raise your hands. i did not ask how many of you dressed up in period garb. where is betsy ross when you need her? they are calling this the left wing tea party movement. it has spread to new orleans, los angeles, boston. the d.c. occupation is nothing new. they have been occupying the health-care system, the financial sector, the supreme court. they have basically been occupying every aspect of our lives, so i bring a message today. the d.c. occupation ends next november. [applause] did any of you in your spare

time watched the president's press conference yesterday? how many of you? four. you have now lives, like me. he said that the protesters represent the broader concern in the nation over the economy. after spending some time data protests, i will tell you that these protests do not represent the broader concerns of their college dormitories let alone the nation. remember a few years back when the former, former come up former house speaker nancy pelosi -- that is not fair, you astro-turfers. now she has called down god's blessing on the occupiers. the tea party people who clean after themselves at a rally ended not leave behind trash, knew how to use a port anajohn,

but this crowd is doing something that obama did not do in wall street. they are creating thousands of sanitation jobs in new york city. that is fantastic. tea party people can read their own signs, right? they quote obscure documents like the declaration of independence. i think the protesters that we are seeing covered so much, herman cain is all a distractio. in the end, either your ideas work or they do not.

right now, let's see what is unfolding with our union friends and mr. soros and others stoking the fires down there. we have an example of when culture in the united states is allowed to flourish. a lot of those in the protests believe if he became a success, you must have cheated, and you must have stolen from someone, so now it is ok for me to take from you. that is not only ok, it is required. that is how they look at the world. you get the sense that a lot of these folks -- all lot of these folks really enjoy the profession of occupying. that is their occupation. occupying. in an occupier. that is my occupation.

-- i am and occupier. it is a lot harder. the tea party people can usually go to a rally, go to an event, and then they go home. ok? these people live in their parents' basement for the most part. we read the great works of edmund burke. they are on craigslist all that. it is ok. we go deeper than that. but we have a lot to do. we have a lot of work going on. we have to help the americas -- the americans living in what i call the obama economy. this is the best way to guide the country forward. we have to introduce them to an optimistic vision that will help them and us -- it is currently a

period of darkness. for too long, we have been hearing about different versions of conservatism. we are trying to tell folks, there is big government conservatism. a few years ago, there was compassionate conservatism. there was an american greatness. of course, there is neoconservatism. i think it is a great idea for us as conservatives to modify ourselves in that manner. in the tradition of a great book called "near christianity," i would like to talk to you about near conservatism. what does it mean to be a

conservative? a lot of people may be watching on c-span. you may have a view of conservatism. they are troglodytes. you look like you should have been on the cover of my new book. but really, as conservatives, we operates in this tradition where we tried to warn against the excesses' of utopianism. thinking back to edmund burke, he warned about the access of the french revolution. conservatives have resisted what appears to be the easy solution. be latest ivory tower scheme cooked up at a late night seminar at harvard or yale. and that is why, we as conservatives, thought it was a good idea to oppose marxism.

and, you know, the idea of prosperity without effort. we did not think that was a good path to go down. that is why we protested so strongly against obama care. we understood the road to bureaucratic tell will always be paved with good intentions. -- bureaucratic hell will always be paved with good intentions. we also think it is probably a good idea to be very judicious and careful before we restructure our economy due to fears like global warming. we have to be really careful going forward. we take a very complex and i would say conservative approach. we realize that public policy is taw.

is not easy. it is not simple to do these things that comprise public policy-making. and we think it is useful to see and learn from what came before us. and would recognize that -- societies are changeable. liberals -- god bless them. they are always changing, chasing after the latticed -- the latest fad. several of the -- liberals are the kardashians of american politics. our role, and the words of william f. buckley, is to stand

in the street yelling "stop." our friends on the left to think every popular idea and in europe is going to work here, that is what they believe. but we are sensitive to the history and preferences of the american people. what works for our own path and our own experience. so, we pay attention to what the founding father said, but it broke, what they thought, and i want to talk very briefly about three principles i think we have to keep in mind and move forward in this historic election year. first, you cannot sustain a great nation on a decaying foundation. we the people are the foundation of this country. i am here to tell you and our nation will only be as secure as

we are in our personal lives. we all have flaws. we all make a mistake. of course we do. we are human. but our deals, right? our bedrock values up honor, faith, modesty, liberty, and yes, patriotism -- these are our mainstays. this is where social conservatism comes in to apply. how many people out there -- and some are running for office i think, they look at social conservatism as a box to be checked, but so they can talk about the real issues, the economy and foriegn policy. @ think that is the wrong way to think of it. you cannot have a strong foreign policy without understanding the concept of duty and loyalty and

jerry. you cannot have a successful economic policy unless you have citizens to believe in hard work and, yes, personal responsibility. [applause] a news flash for our left-wing friends. social conservatism is not only about issues like abortion and marriage, as important as those issues are. we should be really concerned about the countless ways in which our society has become more crass, more depraved, more toxic. more pornified. [applause] you're not supposed to clap for pornified.

don't you hate it when you clap for something and it looks bad? i do the same thing. rihanna wearing a electrical wire as a dress. i want to plug and. is not the same thing. or any random episode of "dbi." -- "the view." they are very nice to me when i go on. as long as i don't talk about politics. they are very nice. what we watch, produce, consume as a culture. this is who we are. and when you go to restaurants and you happen to -- don't you hate when it is prom night? has this ever happened to you? these kids in a stretch hummer,

15-year-old. uc 15-year-old girls with hemlines at their pubic bone and hemlines starting at enables. something is wrong. something is wrong. [applause] okay, my neckline is a little high on the stress. we can it minute, right? don't you all think we need cultural detox? right? we have to be able to do better than this. if there were a national clinic to go to, we should all go through it. the long term path that we are on as a nation -- the culture produces the politicians that we

all seem to be -- they emerge from that culture. and politics reacts to the culture. to the habits, the believes, and the manners of a people. the question is, our wheat sick -- are we to it as a nation to govern ourselves? we will get the government would reserve any given point. we are unfit to govern our nation, if we are -- we are fit to govern our nation if we stand up for merit and do not go down easy path where the other guy is pulling the wagon. sanaa you do not feel like pulling. guess what? we all have to pull. we have to mean that. cannot do it for grudgingly.

we have to engage in this culture if we want to change it. we cannot lull ourselves, as much as we want to. to stay in your own communities and at the chamber's. "i am not going to look at that." i understand, but i am here today to tell you that is a really perilous path to go down. our kids and our grandkids, they are engaging with the sculptor. their friends are in this culture. their acquaintances are what they are listening to. get to know who their friends are. their friends in the culture, their real friends, their virtual friends. understand them. get to know the. we cannot be good examples for a new generation if we are all

talk, but no action. we must be action. we have to be able to talk about conservatism and look like we're having a good time doing it, right? i am so blessed. i have a wonderful job. i get to talk three hours a day about issues i care about. i am so blessed. i will cut and i tried to think, -- i wake up and i try to think, what can i say today and my friends will say "mommy made it matter." i really tried to do that. it is about a desperate desire to leave behind something better

for a different generation. the second principle of conservatism we must embrace is that the duty of any government, the most important duty of any government is the security and sovereignty and safety of its people. our government is supposed to protect our independence, not make us more dependent. and part of that is realizing we are only going to be free as long as we are strong. we talked about how we can be strong as individuals, as consumers of the culture. we need to be strong as a nation. i think we do not think about that. we think about individual policy battles. and we think of those by themselves. need to think about it -- we

need to think about it. as america grows weaker, our options grow fewer. we're seeing this played out right now. have we confronted key questions in this conversation yet in this election-year. what will the world look like when china is the dominant economic power? what alliances will need in the future? how will a world look and what -- how will our families' lives be different? these are big questions. and no, there is not one easy answer to them. but these of the types of issues, not the issues of what is painted on our rock in texas, but these are the issues we need to be focused on in this conversation.

i your questions like "what is on your ipod?" when i hear these questions -- this is what much of the media has become today. do you stop and think -- our country is on the verge of losing its dominant status in the world. we are on the verge of slobbering that. and we are asking what your favorite rock group is and what you like to eat for breakfast? the u.s. government exists to serve the american people, not the other way around. the u.s. government exists to serve us, not anyone who happens to find a way to get here,

including the obama family. this is our government. it does not belong to the world's -- to the world or anyone else. third, we have to return to the basics about the economy. a nation becomes richer when it encourages what? innovation, excellence in education, and when it sells goods and services that other nations want to buy. and a nation cannot become rich by creating housing bubble, exploding more debt and more debt or printing more money and more money.

a nation cannot become rich by outsourcing its technology, its intellectual property to other countries. we have really dug ourselves into a whole. this has been going on for a long time. barack obama was the least living on a street corner when all this was happening. [laughter] yes, that was a critical qualification for running the biggest economy in the world. they are pretending they do not see him now. have fought at the nail salon. you pretend you do not see them. you avoid them. that is what the voters are doing right now.

a government that lives within its means -- it does not waste our money. a culture that recognizes the importance of hard work and the importance of each and every citizen. look. the president cannot even take into account that principle when it comes to things like solyndra. companies have to stand on the ripon. i know republicans have gone down this road before as well. if it is such a great idea -- [applause] i think the president should do all his big green energy speech is wearing sunglasses from now on. would not be cool? the future's so bright, i got

to wear shades. nobody knows music. would found out recently, a lot of people have a lot of friends that happen to make a lot of money in communist china. a lot of big companies make a lot of money. i understand that. but when are we going to say it might not be such a good idea for china to reserve its influence over the u.s. economy? by the way, part of this is celebrating people who are special, and not demonizing the. i just laughed. winery going to sacrifice the family vacations or -- i know it is really important to at the safari, but many in a time when

we are stretched for money, maybe it is not a good time to do this. sacrifice always goes one way with liberals. time to stop it. tax the rich. eat the rich. [laughter] i have my own sign. you got that, c-span? no, i am not going to hug myself. what do i say that? i supports save the children. save the rich people. that is because they actually create opportunity for others.

class envy may sound good and get you applause lines over at warren buffet's headquarters and so forth, but it is not going to do much for the economy or for job creation, and it is probably going to end up meaning a lot of people are laid off. in that is a shame. the job creators, oftentimes the wealthy, are the backbone for charity in this country. they're the backbone of innovation. bay are the backbone of our intellectual capital. and makes us a dominant and could force for our children and for the rest of the world. -- could force for the children and the rest of the world. when you eat the rich or beat the rich, you really do not accomplish much except funnel

more money to washington, d.c. so they can shovel it into more programs that do not create jobs. i do not think we need a new branding and a. people are always looking for the new nunu. -- the new new new. i think we have to stand with what is established and time tested. the truth about self-reliance and freedom and the free-market, be role for faith and morals in this society, the truth about infinite promise, the core goodness of the american people, the truth about the country we all love. and control by the state's less liberty for individuals is a recipe for america's certain

demise. we have seen at home before. it flopped when jimmy carter tried it. if locked in europe. now it will be the worst lot of all time -- the obama administration. [applause] what we need to day is not new conservatives aurelio conservatism or big government conservatism. what we need is near conservatism. that is enough. we are enough. thank you, dies. -- guys. ♪

>> i read hircine -- her sign. any excuse to hug and her, i will do it. please pray for me my wife was not watching c-span at home at that moment. [laughter] okay, we have to move on. our next speaker was elected overwhelmingly to the house of representatives and in 2010, he was elected as u.s. senator and served as a member of the senate republican whip team and chairs the senate action team, has worked to protect religious liberty at home and abroad sponsoring the near east and south central asia act of 2011. he is a proponent of all major

pro-life legislation and he has led the fight for defunding plan to -- planned parenthood. from the great state of missouri, would you please welcome state senator roy blount. as boss -- >> thank you. sit down. a great lineup of speakers. newt gingrich, herman cain. let's see if i can get up here and say what i think should be said. i am pleased to be here. i have benefited from the advice and help of the family research council and be a values motor bus starts up from here today. we did our own bus from missouri last year in 2010, talking to

people about what a critical moment it was. let me mention a couple of things you're doing -- we are doing. mine -- my co-chair is marco rubio from florida. the respect for rights of conscience at. it does not only produce a health-care providers, but they -- but it is also a direct response to the obama determination that everybody's health insurance has to look the same and it has to be the health insurance he thinks we need. contraception, abortion drugs, everything -- and you would pay for it. if you put that in every plan and you have the plan, you're going to pay for it and every taxpayer subsidized plan you're

going to pay for, and one of the reasons this issue has been -- we've been able to deal with this at all is the principle and the mexico city language. if you do not agree, your money does not have to go there, but of course president obama does not agree with that. now we have of bill. the near east and south central pacific asia religious freedom act. several of us in the senate tried to get someone at a desk and the state department whose job it is to make sure people have a religious freedom in a time when in iran -- he is going to be hung. his sentence is death by hanging because he will not renounce his christianity. and a time when in egypt and libya and lots of other places

and, the politics are changing, religious groups that been persecuted for a long time are about to be persecuted even more. i was in egypt a few years ago with four or five members of congress and president mubarak. i brought up the same topic, and president mubarak, i said, not religious freedom is a huge problem here. he said, i never hear anything about that. i am in your country, and you bring it up. i i asked. i brought it up with him a month earlier. and said, president mubarak, surely no the police treat coptic christians badly. he said, oh, the police treat everyone badly. and what happened? police appreciation that. that is when people went to the square last year. i guess they have won every

year. this year, people said, we have had enough of this. every time i heard that was initiated, i said, the police treat everyone badly, but they particularly treated the coptic christians that the. anyone -- badly. anyone in the middle east and central asia, we need to stand up for those principles. and of the speaker and others were talking about dona -- doma. the president says he does not agree and somehow that is enough. the justice department is not going to enforce that any longer. you are here at a time when the federal government is as close to being as fully as functional at the constitutional level as it has ever been. constitutional government at

this moment is just not working. and the regulators are fully activated. there is a movie you may not have seen called "space balls that rest there is one team called hyper speed and another speed called ludicrous be. and the regulators are at ludicrous speed. in the senate, we tried to bring an amendment to the floor on another bill, and the yen and that was to say we did not want the epa to have -- and the amendment was to say we did not want the epa to have this. this is alarming. this would be farming where your crops cannot get outside your field. the majority leader of the united states senate change the rules of the senate -- 51 votes -- changed the rules of the senate, which does not happen in

this area for about 70 years just so his side would not have to vote on fugitive rights. we ought to be looking at all these rules and regulations. first of all, they ought to meet constitutional standards. secondly, they should be responsible for the constitutionally-created government. what we're doing is deciding what the country is going to be for the next generation. you could say, well, i thought we decided that every election. you look back and say, this is your value of voters summit history lesson. if you look back 25 or 30 years, we have this debate about who we're going to be. i see friends in the front row dressed appropriately. our missouri frontier and

another friend. when thomas jefferson was elected president, he saw the government differently than adams in washington, and that is a defining moment. in the first non-lawyer elected -- i am the first non-lawyer elected to the senate in missouri and 40 years. if you look at your history, the next few decades we call jeffersonian america. then does a guy named andrew jackson who says, jefferson -- 28 years later. jefferson, jackson, lincoln, theodore roosevelt, franklin roosevelt, lyndon johnson, ronald reagan, and that clock has come around again. this is an important time. if i thought the only thing happening in america is what is happening in washington, d.c., i

would be incredibly discouraged. but i believe what is happening in america is, we're having this big debate about who we're going to be for 25 or 30 years. to not let your friends think and not think you can set this one up. because it is not going to come around again for a long time. decide if we are going to be like everybody else or not. we're trying to decide if we should be more like western europe. by the way, western europe is pretty aggressively trying to become eastern europe. and eastern europe is trying to be the same thing we are. and we're going to decide who we are. we are going to be everybody else, or are we going to be the united states of america? [applause]

i had a coordinator in my senate campaign. in 2009, my account coordinator, the farm bureau president we were talking about what is happening in the country. this is all of 2009. we're right outside the courthouse. cannonballs were shot into it, and not at a peaceful time. we're setting there and he says, you know, i would like it to look like nobody has been there except the trees look better. we picked up every lamb and leave, -- limb and leaf. my mom and dad were dairy farmers. so i immediately got the involuntary servitude thing. he said, one time they said to

me, they say, why do we do it this way? nobody else does it this way. and he said, every time they said that to me, i look them right in the eye and said if you do it like everybody else does it, you are just everybody else. [applause] and that is what we're deciding any next 50 weeks. we're deciding and we're going to be. the choice is, are we going to be like everybody else? or are we going to say to the world one more time, no, we do not want to be like everybody else. thank you for being here today. ♪ >> back in missouri, oh, yeah ♪

>> another one of our sponsors for the values boater summit is the liberty counsel. joining me now, the president and mr. chairman -- and ceo, kelly shackle ford. is the river walking by ♪ >> i want to make it clear that the liberty institute is it different from the liberty counsel. we're going to start by watching a video i think everyone should see. [trumpet playing] >> yes, my name is predict all i

ask is for the government to make things right. >> this is a case where we are representing the american legion and the national memorial week, pursuing in the va saying they have to stop this religious discrimination. they are banning these veterans from saying things like "god bless you" to of the families of the deceased. to have the veterans administration spitting in the eye of the veterans as they try to bury their comrades, it is really disgusting. >> in this bag, it contains the shells fired for the 21-gun salute. i would like to honor my departed cali.

she said i could not say we wish you and your family great mercy and peace. >> how does that make you feel? >> been able to fight for their rights -- it affected me personally, because basically, i think i should be able to say at. -- say its. >> we write a personal card before the funeral. we give it to the family member. know we have done our part. we will do this for the family member. we are told not to say a and " god bless you and god bless your family." >> this is the freedom they

fought for all of us to have, and we must return the favor, the best way we possibly can, which is to allow our veterans regular feelings. they deserve our help and they deserve us all to stand gather to honor their freedom as they have so treasured and honored hours. >> seen the video of that case -- seeing the video that case, number one, our veterans deserve better than that. [applause] you have my promise that liberty institute is going to fight this case as long and hard as we have to until when it is over we win and the veterans have the rides back to mention -- their rights back to mention god at all our

military funerals. [applause] and you can go to that online, see those videos. i encourage you to do that. people need to know this is happening. i had the privilege of introducing someone who is the next great conservative pope. i like him not because they have nice things to say about him. what i want to know -- are they going to be in the trenches with you? and ted cruz has done that. he was co-counsel in the mojave desert case. some people have said it he is the combination of the intellectual skill and principles of mike lee and the personal story of a marco ru

bio. his father escaping from fidel castro, working as a dishwasher, and his son going to harvard law school. he stood against 90 countries and the president of the united states, arguing for u.s. sovereignty versus the international courts, and he won that case. [applause] so, welcome the next great conservative help. -- hope. ted cruz. [applause] >> thank you very much. is great to be with some many dear friends. kelly shackleford is that true

defender of liberty. i look forward to working with him and with you for the next few decades of defending our liberty. we live in a time of miracles. we're standing here right now with 3000 christian conservatives battling washington, d.c. i am told that the department of homeland security put out a terrorist alert. and you know what? they have reason to be worried. [cheers] --1776 [laughter] i see some of my friends from then right now. 56 men pledged their lives,

fortunes to defend the in a local rights -- to defend the inalienable rights of each one of us. pager is standing for liberty change the world. in 1980, a great many of the men in this room have stood up to a far left president who believes in government control of the economy and refuses to defend american exceptional as a. and we were part of the reagan revolution. what i am here to tell you is we're seeing that all over again. all over this nation, we are seeing a great awakening. the american people are rising up and together we're going to retake our nation. [applause]

barack obama is the most radical president this nation has ever had. he is a true believer in what he believes in his government. governor rules the economy and our lives. five weeks ago, the credit of the united states was downgraded for the first time in our nation's history. president obama had the audacity to blame that on the tea party. you know, that is a little bit like charlie sheen blaming it on the betty ford clinic. it is fundamentally a misunderstanding the source of the problem. in 1980, jimmy carter gave us ronald reagan.

and i am convinced the long lasting legacy of barack obama is a new generation of leaders standing up to fight for liberty and the constitution. how do we retake our nation? i'm going to suggest three very simple things to retake the united states of america. #1 -- stand for principle. a big part of the reason barack obama got elected was to republicans lost their way. republicans were standing for

much of anything. i do not know republican who did not hold his nose and vote for the lesser of two evils. so, how retake? we go back and fix what we did run before. we stand for principle. i had the honor of serving as the solicitor general of texas. during the five and a half years in office, over and over again, texas stood up and fought to defend the conservative principles. and we won on a national level. working with kelly shackleford,

we defeated the 10 commandments issue and took it to the supreme court and won 5-4. when a federal court of appeals in california struck down the pledge of allegiance if it includes the words of " one nation under god," we brought together all 50 states, went to the supreme court and won unanimously. here in the district of columbia, we brought together 30 states, went to the supreme court and stood together to defend the second amendment right to keep and bear arms. and we won 5-4. we brought together a coalition of states before the u.s. supreme court defending the federal partial birth abortion

act criminalizes that terrific practice and we won 5-4. we're seeing religious liberty and conservative values throughout the country. one of the most under assault areas is the right of conscience. you are seeing christians told they must participate in abortions despite the teachings of god. they were told they had to participate and sanction gay marriage even though the religious teachings tell them otherwise. we have to stand together for religious liberty.

one of the cases i have been at most honored to litigate was with kelly shackleford, where we defended the constitutionality of the mojave desert veterans memorial. we went to the u.s. supreme court and won 5-4. and the biggest fight of my time as solicitor general was a case that began with a rhythmic crime or two teenage girls were tragically -- with a terrific crime where two teenage girls were rap -- were tragically gang raped in houston. in order was issued to reopen convictions of 51 murderers across the country. the first time in the history of

our nation, the court to try to bind the u.s. justice system. wasted up to the -- we stood up to the supreme court. on the other side were 94 nations, and the president of united states. the president signed an order. texas stood up. we thought the world court. we thought the united nations. we thought 94 nations and we thought the president of united states. -- we fought the president of united states. we defended u.s. sovereignty, and we won 6-3.

so, the first thing we need to do is stand for liberty, principal. the second thing need to do is stand for liberty. this administration is presiding over a government takeover of our economy at all level that has never before been seen. the truth of the matter, when the government is between you and your doctor, between you and your job, you and your everyday life, what is lost is liberty and opportunity. free enterprise works. government planners, when they are picking winners and losers, the most incredible thing about solyndra was not predictable it was. is not government's job to be

handing out -- it is the government's job to be handing out a billion here and a billion there. we need to stand for liberty, and there is nothing more important united states senate can do ban repeal every syllable of every word of obamacare. the third thing we need to do -- stand for america. the foundations of our nation are being threatened. in my life, like all of our lives, my family background influences me greatly. my dad is my hero. he was born in cuba.

he was 17 times -- he was 17 years old when he was beaten almost to death. my father fled cuba in came to the united states when he was 18. he did not speak a word of english. he landed in austin, texas with no possessions. other than he had $100 son into his underwear. my grandmother put it there. he does not carry money in his underwear any more. he got a job as a dishwasher. he worked seven days a week. when i was a kid, my dad used to say to me all the time "when we face oppression in cuba, i had a place to flee to. if we lose our liberties here, where do we go?" you know what? that question underscores why

everyone of us is here today standing up to fight. my father is now pastor. on april 15, 2009 he spoke to the dallas t party -- tea party, and he said when i was a young man, i saw a young charismatic leader come to power, and he promised hope and change. and he promised to redistribute the wealth. what happened subsequently is the journalist posted this in texas and said, this is a bit overstated, to compare barack obama to fidel castro.

that seems extreme. a bunch of liberal commentators started hyperventilating. i did something i have never double for. i used my own name and i said all of you think it's hysterical. i want to point out one thing. he never once mentioned the words "barack obama." [laughter] he simply describes what fidel castro did. what does it say about you that you hear what castro did and you think immediately that should be barack obama? i would like to close with apologies to our current president.

family -- the u.s. senate? >> yes, we can. >> can we retire harry reid? >> yes, we can. >> can we repeal obamacare? >> yes, we can. >> and can we defeat president barack obama? >> yes, we can. >> that, my friends, that this change we can believe in. thank you very much. god bless you. ♪

>> all right, ladies and gentlemen, we're going to close out our day with two other presidential candidates, beginning with a man who grew up in atlanta, a georgia. with loving parents and little else. his father worked three jobs and his mother was a domestic worker. the new hard work was -- a new hard work was the key to achieving their american dream. their son graduated from morehouse college with a degree in physics in 1967, inspired by the work ethic and character of his parents. he continue his education while working full time to develop

fighter control systems for fighter planes. his highly successful business career at including vice president of pillsbury co. and president of godfather's pizza saw a dramatic turnaround with his leadership. is personal successes have demanded the recognition of industry leaders who named him president of the national restaurant association. he began working with business leaders all this week, simon and schuster released his newest book, "this is herman cain, my journey to the white house." please welcome a man who embodies the fulfillment of the american dream and a candidate for the president of the united states, herman cain. [applause] ♪

>> love ya. love ya. love ya. thank you. [applause] thank you very much. as i was backstage and i heard ted finishing up his remarks, that i hear you say, "yes, we can?" clause i hearing things? -- was i hearing things? i want to think tony perkins and his organization for inviting me. more importantly, i want to thank you for being here because that means that you get it. you know how important this upcoming election in 2012 is and you will not let the liberals

take this country down. [applause] one of my heroes, dr. benjamin hays, used to remind when he said, "but let the tragedy of life not be in your life, but not having any goals to reach for." it is a calamity to have no dreams. the american dream is under attack because we have become a

nation of crises. that shining city on a hill that ronald reagan spoke about is about to slide down the side of the hill because of all of these crises. we have an economic crisis, an entitlement-spending crisis, an energy crisis, and illegal immigration crisis, a foggy foreign policy crisis, a moral crisis, and we have a severe deficiency of leadership crisis in this country. [applause] you know, i may not have never

had a high political office, but i know what leaders do. leaders make sure they're working on the right problems, that they are finding the right priorities, that they surround themselves with the right people in order to put together the right blend, in order to fix stuff, in order to continue to talk about things. that is what leaders continue to do. i happen to believe that even though the american dream is under attack that the founding fathers got it right. those same principles, those same values that they had when they envisioned this great nation, when they one day it envisioned the constitution, they got it right. they said we are endowed by

their creator with certain enable rights that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. they said certain inalienable rights. i happen to think they were talking about some others. i kind of believe that they had in mind that one of these other inalienable rights was the right to protect yourself coming protect your family come and protect your property. we call it the second amendment. [applause] inalienable rights. [applause] just to set the record straight, when you run for president and you move into the "top tier" -- i'm just sayin'.

you get this a bull's-eye on your back. people will take a potshot left and right, but i do not want you to be unclear about where i stand on certain things. you will not be confused by some of the garbage that people are becauseo throw out theire they are a little bit afraid that this long shot may not be a long shot any longer. [applause] let me just set the record straight. life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. i believe in life from conception, period, no exceptions. [applause] i believe that marriages between

one man and one woman. i would not have asked the department of justice to not enforce it. i would have asked the department of justice to defend the defense of marriage act. i happen to believe that the founding fathers put it in that order, life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness in that order. you can pursue happiness as long as you want to as long as you do not tread on someone else's liberty. you can pursue liberty all you want to as long as you do not tread on someone else's life which includes the life of the unborn. [applause] the pursuit of happiness is like my parents that pursued

their definition of happiness. my mom was a domestic worker, that was a barber, a janitor, and a chauffeur. dad went to pursue his american dream with the only kind of equity he had, sweat equity. he was able to achieve his american dream, he and my mother. he wanted to give us a better start in life and he didn't. dad wanted to make sure that one day he could buy a whole house for the family. we lived in what we called a half a house, three rooms on one side, three rooms of the other side. we lived in half of that. my brother and i used to say, "dad, why do we live in half of a house?" dad said, "it's a duplex."

we did not know dad was saving for his dreams which would be to 1 day buy a whole house for the family, and he did. he knew the pursuit of happiness meant working those three jobs. he also knew the pursuit of happiness meant the three things they instilled in my brother and i. if you want to achieve your american dream which is your belief in god, belief in yourself, and belief in the greatest country in the world, the united states of america. we are exceptional. [applause] we might be the shining city on a hill that has slid down to the side of the hill temporarily, but we're still the nation that all the other nations in the world looked up to because we

are an exceptional nation and i will never apologize for america's greatness. [applause] one of the questions that i guess about -- get asked about sometimes is growing up in the civil rights movement. i grew up in the civil rights movement in atlanta, georgia during the 1950's 1960's and i was around when they signed it in 1974 -- 1964. this nation has made it through a civil war. of this nation has made it through the struggle we had for slavery, jim crow laws, civil rights. a reporter asked me just yesterday, "welcome are not you

angry? about how america has treated you/" i said, "sir, you don't get it. i have achieved all of my american dreams and then some because of the great nation, the united states of america." what is there to be angry about? [applause] angry? one of america's greatest strengths is its ability to change. we have weathered those changes. that is what makes this nation great. one of the reasons that i'm on

the journey that i am on is because i want to make sure that my children, my grandchildren, your children, your grandchildren have an opportunity to be able to pursue their american dreams. the pursuit of happiness, as long as you do not tread on someone else's liberty, those demonstrations on wall street, they are anti-capitalism. they are anti-free market. when a reporter asked me the other day, "what do you think about those demonstrations up on wall street?" i said, "first of all, the white house -- wall street did not write those policies, the white house did. why do not move this to the white house?" that is why you do not have a job or business. move it to the white house. [applause]

it gets back to working on the right problem. they are not working on the right problem. wall street did not write this bill policies. wall street did not spend $1 trillion. wall street is that asking to spend another $450 billion. you can demonstrate all you want on wall street. the problem is at 1600 pennsylvania avenue. [applause] that is the issue never worked on the right problem, you'll never get the right answer. the founding fathers get it right. let me tell you one other thing they got it right is which is why you are a part of the

citizen movement going on across this country. they got it right. there is a caller to my radio show one night when i was still on the radio -- when you run for president, you become unemployed. i have not figured that out yet. you become unemployed, my friend, but it is not about us but about those ground -- grand kids. i'm frustrated because i do not like the direction of this country and i do not know what i can do about it. so i said, well, do you vote on a regular basis? yes. in all the elections? yes. do you have a copy of the declaration of independence? yes. but i told him to go get it. he was flipping through the pages and asked him if he found it.

i told him to go to the section that everyone is familiar with -- life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. did you find it? yes. now i said, here is what you can do if you want to change the direction of this nation. he asked what that was. i told him not to that part to keep reading. -- him when he got there to keep reading. "when any form of government becomes destructive of those ideals, it is the rights of the people to alter palaces -- to alter and abolish." we have some altering and abolishing a to do it. [applause] it is our fight. alter and abolish. [applause]

under a cain presidency, we will alter obamacare and repeal it. we will alter dodd-frank and repeal it. reporter asked me what problems i had with the dodd-franc. i only have three problems. the first is that the catalyst to the financial meltdown of 2008-two dozen mine was because of a lack of oversight on fannie mae and freddie mac. there were this new legislation that still did not include oversight over fannie mae and freddie mac. that is my first problem with dodd-frank. my second problems are dodd and frank. it is not complicated. [applause]

they were the same two who did not do their job the first time and now they want to rewrite legislation the second time? we have to repeal that and abolish the dodd-frank, called the is that the administration is pushing down the throats of american businesses. with all of these crises, let me give you some good news. we can fix them. we can fix them, folks. time does not permit me to go through my solutions, so let me demonstrate how i approach this problem, which is how i would lead this nation. let's start with foreign policy. my foreign-policy philosophy is an extension of the reagan velocipede -- philosophy, peace through strength.

[applause] the cain philosophy is peace through strength and clarity. we must clarify who our friends are, clarify who our enemies are, and stop giving money to our enemies. [applause] as we clarify who our friends are, then tell the rest of the world who are our friends that we will stand by so that they will know not to mess with our friends, like the nation of israel. if you mess with israel, you are messing with the united states of america. [applause]

mr. cain, what are you going to do about iran? here's what i'm going to do. i'm going to utilize a capability that we have that most are on aware of. i learned about them when i served on a committee for strategic air command. we have the ballistic missile detection capability at sea as well as on land better than any other country in the world. we of the ability to upgrade those missile defense systems on all of our warships, and we have the ability to double the number of torture -- warships and strategically placed them anywhere in the world to detect missiles fired from those locations toward a friend or towards us and not get out of the sky before it reaches its

apex. i would make it a priority to upgrade all of our service to air missile defense technology on all of our warships all the way around the world and make it a priority. then i would say to ahmadinejad, "make my day." [applause] peace through strength and clarity. make it clear where america stands with its friends. one more example, this economy is on life support. we cannot keep tinkering around the edges.

this is why i, along with my economic advisory team, developed a bold solution, not another simple messing around the edges solution, but a solution that starts with a throwing out the existing tax code, which is a mess. [applause] kaput replace it with my -- but replace it with my 9-9-9- plan. 9% flat corporate tax, 9% flat personal tax, and a 9% national sales tax. those would replace the payroll tax, the capital gains tax, death tax, corporate income tax, personal income tax, and it will save all of us $430 billion per year that we spend to fill out

the stupid tax code. 9-9-9. [applause] i told you about the bull's-eye on my back. they are already trying to prove why this is not a bad idea. very serious thinking went into this so it would be revenue neutral. when you see some of these reports talking about how it will not do this or that, they have changed it the assumption. if you want to know what the assumptions are, come to me and my people and we will explain it to you. they do not want to do that. 9-9-9 does something very beneficial. it provides certainty to the business community because businesses will get out of survival mode and go back into growth mode. 9-9-9 means jobs, jobs, jobs.

[applause] what other benefits are there? we have already had it evaluated by outside sources. it will get government out of the business of picking winners and losers. all businesses are created the same. there will be no loopholes other than the small number of deductions you could make personally like charitable deductions, business purchases, capital investment. if you buy ingredients for your products from u.s. companies you can deduct it before you apply your 9%. if you buy your ingredients from foreign countries, it is not deductible. it is called leveling the playing field [applause] it gets government out of the

business of picking winners and losers and allows the free market system to pick the winners and losers. that is what 9-9-9 plan does -- working on the right problem. one of the other questions that i often get, as i close, is why i am running for president. to be president. [laughter] [applause] what did i miss? i am not running to go to disneyland. [laughter] america has problems. i am a problem solver. that is why i am running. my challenge to you is to stay

informed because we are up against a lot of stupid people in america. they do not have a clue. that is why you have to be informed. secondly, stay involved. come to conferences like this. go to rallies, go to house parties, go to parties where you watch the debate and do your own evaluations. go to web sites to do your own research. stay involved because it is the informed and be involved that are going to make sure that we change the outcome of the november 2012 election different than what the liberals want. thirdly, stay inspired. they want you to believe that we cannot do this. just like three months ago i was where the political pundits

said, "herman cain cannot get the nomination because he does not have high name recognition or eight trillion dollars and he has never had a public office." the million people are saying they do not care. america wants to raise cain, not more money. [applause] stay inspired. because i am running for the presidency because i am inspired. not because i am worried about me and my wife of 43 years. it is for the grand kids. i have three grandkids. it is not about us folks, but the grand kids.

i remember the first time i looked in the face of my first grandchild back in 1999 in the first thought that went through my head is, "what do i do to make this a better nation and a better world?" i did not know the answer then. it took me 12 years and the grace of god to figure out what my journey should be at this point in my life. just like every major decision and every major challenger have faced in my life after a lot of prayer and soul-searching -- prayer and soul-searching -- once i made the decision, i never looked back. that is why when i worked with my publishers to come up with the title of my book, "this is herman cain -- my journey to the white house"i had someone say to me that it was a pretty bold

statement. i know it is. i put it on there for a reason, because i am going to the white house. [applause] i did it for a reason. i want you to help me as the republican nominee and as president to help push that shining city on a hill back to the top of that the hill where it belongs. we can do that, folks. we can do that because we have the resources. we have the determination. we have life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. it is our right and our responsibility to do some altering and abolishing.

we will be able to push that shining city on a hill back to the top of the hill. ronald reagan, the gipper, reminds us just how fragile this thing called freedom and this thing called liberty really is when he said, "freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. you cannot pass it on in the bloodstream. it must be fought for and protected, for one day we will spend our sunset years of telling our children and our grandchildren with the united states of america used to be like when men were free." i will not have that conversation with my grandkids, and i do not believe you want to have that conversation with your grandkids.

into me put "united" back the united states of america and and let's retake the hill, the shining city on of the hill, the united states of america. [applause] [applause] >> any questions? [laughter] >> if not, we will move on to our final speaker of the afternoon. we are deeply honored to walk on

the architect of the contract with america that led the republican party to victory in 1990 for a buyer capturing the republican -- 1994 by capturing the republican majority in the house of representatives. congress also cut taxes for the first time in 16 years and reformed welfare, leading 60% of welfare recipients to get a job or to go to school. he and his wife host and producer award winning documentary films including "a city on a hill," "ronald reagan, rendezvous with destiny." he is the author of 23 books, including 13 new york times bestsellers. when time magazine named him man of the year, they said leaders

make thinks possible. exceptional leaders -- things possible. exceptionally does make things inevitable. he is running for president of the united states of america. welcome to the podium, mr. speaker, newt gingrich. ♪ [applause] >> you know, you are here at an historic moment. this is the first time in american history that two georgians running for president have been back to back talking to an audience. [laughter] [applause] i was just comparing notes with

herman offstage. the elite media said this was a two person race. i think they may be right. but they had the wrong two people. [applause] it is interesting that the two guys who have gotten the most money have lost the most votes and the two guys with the most ideas have gained the most votes. that might convince the elite media that there is more to politics than consultants and maybe having a hard and a bright matters a lot. [applause] i think we are in a time of enormous challenge. parts of that challenge is barack obama. but i think it is much deeper. bureaucracy is out of control. we have judges who don't

understand the constitution. we have teachers who do not believe in the american history. we have an academic class that is out of touch with the american people. we have a lot of work to do. recently, i released a 21st century contract with america. it outlines this scale of change. it outlines the legislative program and a thursday program of specific executive orders. -- a first day program of specific executive orders. imagine inauguration day. the inauguration is over. we start signing between 5200 specific orders moving the government away from obama and back toward the american tradition. [applause]

you can go to newt.org and you will see a section. we will release all of the executive orders by october 1 of next year. i will be part of the closing months of the closing campaign. the president says he is for one of them, we will print it out and he can sign it. [laughter] i do not know what all of them will be. i will tell you what the first one will be. around 3:45 on the afternoon of the inauguration, about the time president obama gets to andrews air force base to go back to chicago -- [applause] i will sign executive order number one, that will abolish every white house czar. [applause]

i wanted to come today to talk about an historic crisis that only in directly relates to be president. abraham lincoln said, if you debate somebody who does not agree that two plus two = four, you cannot win the arguments because facts make no difference. i want to start with that. imagine by a 5-4 vote that the supreme court decided two plus two equals 5. under the current theory, the only effective recourse would be either to get a future supreme court to reverse them, or to pass a constitutional amendment to declare that two plus two

equal four. do any of you seriously believe that if five appointed lawyers decided that ability plausibility --note to e plus two = -- two plus two equals five that we would change our budgeting system? is absurd. it cannot be true that it founding fathers wrote into the constitution an elaborate process of amending the constitution and said, the supreme court the supreme5-4 between -- supreme court is split 5-4 between liberals and conservatives. if he gets up and he feels liberal, he was to be liberal. it is an absurdity hoisted on us

by an historic lie. there is no judicial supremacy. is does not -- it does not exist in the american constitution. [applause] let me be clear. judicial supremacy is actually wrong. it is morally wrong. and is an affront to the american system of self- government. [applause] one of the major reasons that i am running for president of the united states is the ninth circuit court decision in 2002 that one nation under god in the pledge of allegiance is unconstitutional. that decision at the san effect that the dread scott decision -- same effect that the dread scott

decision had on abraham lincoln. -- dred scott decision had on abraham lincoln. the judiciary cannot be anti- american and expect us to tolerate them radically changing our society by judicial dictate. [applause] what i am say to you is that in the american revolution, read the declaration of independence. a large number of its specific charges involved dictatorial judges. the founding fathers deeply distrusted judges. they thought the lawyer class was dangerous and that you could

not give them an unbridled power or they would undermine and destroy a free society. this is not a marginal position. thomas jefferson asked about judicial supremacy said that is an absurdity. that would be an oligarchy. i think we are faced with one of the great crossroads of american life. if judges think they are under challenge of all, they are inevitably corrected -- corrupted in a sense of imposing on the rest of us. whether it is one judge in california that decides he knows more about 8 million -- more than 8 million californians about the definition of marriage -- [applause] whether it is a judge in san antonio who ruled that not only can school children not say a prayer at their graduation, they

cannot use the word benediction, and location, god -- and if they do any of these things, it will lock up the superintendent. the idea of an american judge becoming a dictator of words is so alien to our tradition and such a violation of our constitution, that that particular judge should be removed from office summarily. [applause] power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. the courts in the last 50 years have proved that lord acton was right. the judges have become more hostile to the american

tradition. they talk about using foreign sources of information because the american constitution is so old and so antiquated. the justice who believes that should not be serving on the american band. [applause] we have a lengthy paper, years of effort by number of bus, which we have published this afternoon at newt.org, which outlines how. anti-american the current judicial model is. it is profoundly wrong. as the king has pointed out, one of the major impediments and threats to democracy today is the behavior at law schools that teach usurpation of power in a way that is unsustainable.

our constitution was designed on the concept of the balance of power. we are supposed to have threeco- equal -- three co-equal levels of power. this is one of the most important things we will explore over the next year. because this is a more complicated topic for a 32nd answer during a game show version of a debate, -- 3030 second answer during a game show version of a debate -- 30 second

answer during a game show debate -- i will challenge the president to a debate with no moderator. [applause] one of those debates should be on the declaration of independence, the constitution, the federalist papers, and the nature of the american judiciary. jefferson is the most clear example of taking on the judiciary. in the judiciary reform at the the jeffersonians eliminated 18 judges. i am not as bold as jefferson.

the ninth circuit court should be served notice that it runs the risk of ceasing to exist. jackson, was told that the supreme court said it was unconstitutional. he said, fine, that is their opinion. he said, i have a different opinion. i am be president. i get my opinion in the white house. lincoln spent a large section of his first inaugural address explaining why it dredd scott decision cannot be the law of the land. he refuses to enforce the decision while he is president. people come in and say, as nancy pelosi said, when the court speaks, it is as if god speaks. having someone from her breast

of the party represent -- acknowledge god is an important step. [applause] on the issue of god in american public life, the country was created because we are in doubt by our creator. the courts have gotten more anti-religious and more hostile. on the question of national security, in the last few years, the courts have become out of touch with reality. the idea that the courts will take on the responsibility for defending the united states is a clear and fundamental violation of the constitution and a violation of the executive branch's power. congress should pass a lot repudiating every interference of the court on national- security issues and returning them to the congress where they

rightfully belong. on abortion, the courts are laboring all of the place. they started with a stupid decision over here and they have modified it at least twice since then. they do not know what they are doing. we should explore what we can use the 14th amendment to define life in a congressional statute and insist that the the law of the land. it is something we should look at seriously. [applause] on marriage, it should be quite clear on issues like the defense of marriage at that we should say it cannot be appealed. it is clear in the constitution. congress can decide what can be appealed. congress can exclude things going to the court.

in 1902, then refused to let judges hear about something until they wiped out all of the judges. this is written in the constitution. i mentioned jefferson. there are other steps you can take that are far short of wiping out all of the judges. you could hold hearings. were congress to bring in the judge in san antonio and say, explain to us your rationale. by what right will you dictate speech to the american people? how can you take the first demands and and tell us this is about the speech? judges who knew that when they were radically wrong they would be hauled in front of congress would have a sobering effect on how much power they have. [applause] presidents can follow the precedent of lincoln. i would instruct the national

security officials in the game which administration to ignore the recent decisions of seats -- ginrich administration to ignore the recent decisions of the supreme court on national security. the source of that is franklin delano roosevelt. [applause] in 1942, a group of german saboteurs landed in florida and long island. they were picked up within the two weeks. roosevelt brought in his attorney general and said they will be tried and executed in a military court. tell the supreme court that it may issue a writ of habeas corpus i will not out of it. i am commander and chief in wartime. they are not. [applause] congress has the power to limit the appeals that i mentioned

earlier. congress can cut budgets. congress can say, in the future of the nine circuits can meet, but they will have no clerics. we will not pay the electric bill for two years. since you seem to be rendering justice in the dark, you do not need your law library either. [laughter] i am paraphrasing hamilton in the federalist papers in which he is the spending -- he says the judiciary is the weakest of the three branches. this modern model is opposite of the american tradition. i am on the outline for you. the legislative part of the 21st century contract with america.

the struggle we are going to have with the lawyer class over shrinking their power and their dreams of being the people who dictate to america how we should be a -- just in that one zone, i imagine how big the conflict would be. how do we create jobs? how do we get the national labor relations bowl under -- board under control? how do we replace the department of protection agency with and in our mental solution agency that has common-sense? step after step up things that really matter. how do we control the border by january 1 of 2014. you can do that. just passed a law saying we will suspend any regulation or law that would inhibit us from securing our borders. no confusion. get it done now. [applause]

each of these steps will be back with extent of resistance by the reactionary forces who had dreams of creating a radically different america. it said the step that could win if we are going to give our children and grandchildren be free, safe, and prosperous country that our parents and grandparents gave us. i came here today because i think this is one to be a tremendous struggle. i did not come here today to ask you to be for me. if you are or me, you are going to vote and say -- for me, you will go home and vote and say, i hope newt gingrich doesn't. the president can lead the american people in educating the congress in changing things. if we shrink the power of washington by applying the 10th

amendment, we have to throw citizens back home. [applause] i came today to take this opportunity to outline for you one of the great historic decisions we will make off with the next few years. whether we take back the courts, rebalance the constitution. in a newt gingrich administration, only people dedicated to the original document and its original meeting will get a court appointment at any level. [applause] that me just close and say to all of you, i am here to ask you

to be with me, to ask you to be 8 here is so that we america-- or the8 yers -- so that we8 years so that we -- 8 years so that we reclaim america. you will be with me, we will decisively defeat barack obama, we will defeat the democrat in the senate. over the next few years, we will decisively reclaim america as the land of the three and the home of the break. thank you. good luck. god bless you. [applause]

>> all right, everybody. we are about to be dismissed. i have a couple of announcements. many of you are thinking, we have gone over time. that response the same way i did to my three teenagers when they would comply. i know. newt is doing a book signing in the foyer, but only until i finish announcements. there is a book signing to ma at 8 o'clock 45. -- 8:45 a.m. students, do not miss the student mix air with the young

conservatives around the country. it starts in the entire room as i 30 p.m. --5:30 p.m. straw polling. a lot of you are not voting on our straw poll. you want to do it as soon as you can. it closes tonight at 7:00 p.m. it goes to 1:00 p.m. at the registration. mobile voting is available. just scan the barcode on your name tag. you have a smartphone, you can navigate to be website bbsmobile.org. it was created by our partners and features up to the minute schedule and speaker information and your straw poll voting. you can find more information in

your registration packet. for the best straw poll results, vusut bbs22453. please remember to take your materials with you. we will reconvene at 7:20 p.m. we will open the doors as soon as possible. there will be a huge crowd tonight. if you want to get there early, moved to the center and to make room for everybody. there will be speeches by michele bachmann and -- thank you. ♪ [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011]

>> we have been bringing you all day coverage of the values voter summit. the earlier portion is in our library. we have more "road to the white house" coverage. michele bachmann will be in new hampshire live on sunday at 330

p.m. coming up on sunday, former utah government -- the top of, under jon -- governor jon huntsman will be speaking. our series, "the contenders" continues with a look at the career of charles evans hughes. on c-span.org2, remarks -- c- span 2, remarks from rick perry. and former labor secretary robert reischauer speaks at a onference on be -progress -- robert reich speaks on the

progressive movement. >> i was paying close attention to the discussion. i fail to give it not on the door. they got an answer the door and made me feel like i was two feet high. i learned from that that one of the most important jobs of a junior justice is to be the doorman. >> john paul stevens on his new memoir, "five chiefs." >> some people say that to succeed in this world, we need to be more like india, china, or brazil. i say we need to be more like us. >> on this final sunday of british party conferences, david cameron sets the tone and goals for his party in the upcoming year. what his keynote address from

the conservative party conference sunday at 9 on c- span. on wednesday, look for the return of prime minister's questions on c-span 2. >> the head of the national terrorism center on thursday said the threat from al qaeda remains despite the death of its leader, anwar al-awlaki. other issues discussed included cyber security threats and home broad terrorist.

>> we have votes scheduled this morning. i suggest my opening statement be made part of the record and hopefully we can move to the witnesses to get this under the space way. -- underway. >> this is an open hearing. i have given credit to jan schakowsky. this is important to her. >> without objection, but statements will be made part of the official record. with that, i will turn it over to you, director. welcome to the committee on intelligence. thank you. >> thank you for having us here today. we appreciate the opportunity to appear before the committee. since september 11, the threat from terrorism as a bald from

ways that present new challenges for the fbi and for our partners. the threat environment is more complex and diverse than ever before. in response, the fbi has undergone unprecedented transformation of the past 10 years. we have developed new capabilities necessary to address terrorists and criminal threats. we have created the administrative and technological structure to meet our mission as a national security agency. we have made these changes while continuing to safeguard american civil liberties. let me begin by focusing on the most serious threats we face today and discuss how the fbi has changed since september 11 to counter those bets. the? of anwar al-awlaki -- the death of anwar al-awlaki was a major blow. he had taken a lead role on planning and directing attacks

on the homeland, such as the failed christmas day bombing in 2009 and the cargo plane in 2010. he was also committed to inspiring accept terrorism overseas, particularly using the internet to promote loan actor operations in the west. -- lone actor operations in the west. we must maintain our vigilance in responding to this threat. a strike against its leadership does not eliminate a potential for retaliation or other action by aqap. they are also committed to high- profile attacks directed at the west. there was a plot to attack the new york subway system. we have confirmed this from materials seized on the rate of

osama bin laden last bring. we continue to thread -- to track threats from al qaeda. other groups from the region have similarly shown the intent to target the united states. we saw this when ttp claimed responsibility for the times square attempted bombing. these groups encouraged radicalize westerners to travel overseas for training with the potential to return to the united states to conduct an attack. the threat from home prone -- homegrown extremists is one of the serious threats today. these individuals may have come from diverse backgrounds and life experiences.

they may have differing mode since. increasingly, they may act alone. for these reasons, homegrown violent extremists are harder to detect and distrust. the fbi is focused more than ever on this threat. the overall threat environment has evolved significantly since september 11. this requires the fbi and our partners to change and adapt constantly to address these threats. as you are aware, the fbi has undergone an unprecedented change since the years in -- in the years since september 11. we continue to focus on national security threats as our highest priority. after september 11, the bureau shifted to a thousand agents to national security matters. we centralized management of counterterrorism and terrorist operations.

structurally, we created a national security branch in the 2005 to consolidate and integrate the bureau's national security mission, to accelerate the integration of intelligence into our national security operations. we have also established a directorate of intelligence headquarters that manages our intelligence programs nationwide. we hired and trained thousands of new intelligence agents to enhance our intelligence capabilities. on aware september 11, we greatly increase the number of joint terrorism task force is operating around the nation. we have more than 100 of those task forces. these task forces bring forth expertise from our federal, state, and local partners to keep our communities safe. this effort has led to numerous

successes in disrupting terrorist plots and threats. after september 11, we recognize the need to recruit hire trained and less necessary to meet the requirements of our national security mission. in 2001, the bureau had 1000 intelligence analysts and u.s. and 30 supervisory analysts. we have tripled the number of intelligence analysts to 3000. let me turn to a second to be cyber threats. let me if the size the fbi's role in countering cyber attacks. one of the most significant and complex threats facing the nation. our intelligence and law force -- law-enforcement capabilities make us uniquely qualified to address cyber intrusions. this includes counterterrorism,

counterintelligence, and criminal. in 2007, the bureau worked with our partners and established the national cyber investigation joint task force, which includes 20 intelligence community agencies. through these partnerships, the fbi has identified, investigated, and prosecuted an unprecedented number of intrusion cases. the financial and telecommunications sector and other critical infrastructure. in addressing this cyber threat, it will be among the fbi's highest priorities now and in the years to come. that me conclude by thanking the committee for your continued support for the men and women of the fbi and your support of our mission. this has been a center of -- is central to our transformation and the need to be today's threats. thank you. i would be happy to answer any questions you might have.

>> thank you for being here. >> thank you for and biking me to testify here this morning on the car and terrorist threats to the united states and our efforts to address that threat. it is appropriate that we continue to reflect on the day that our nation suffered the single most destructive attack in our history. congress established the national counterterrorism theory. every day, our employees into the center and they walk past the 9/11 memorial. is a stark reminder of our legacy and our mission. after ducking months on the job, i can report that the center is a national asset. it has counted and intelligence professionals representing a wide range of experiences and perspectives. it followed the tradition of past leaders. my testimony today reflects the big risk analysis of our workforce. thanks to the skill and hard

work of thousands of men and women in the intelligence, homeland security, and the diplomatic law enforcement committee and our -- and force the community and our men and women in uniform, we have made progress. we have built and in during counterterrorism feinberg. this fine work includes a strengthened and threatened -- strengthen and stronger fbi. today, al qaeda's core organization is weaker than at any time in the last three years. we have put counterterrorism pressure on al qaeda and its leadership. we had undermined al qaeda's ability to plan attacks. we have denied the group said havens and the ability to plot and train. core al qaeda is degrading.

last week, anwar al-awlaki, a leader in the arabian peninsula was killed in yemen. he repeatedly called individuals in the united states to commit acts of terror. is death represents a blow to al qaeda's most active member. a decade after the september 11 attacks, we remain at war with al qaeda. remains an active -- and adapted in. but continued to face and he bopping threat from al qaeda. for the balance of my remarks, i will describe the threats we face and describe the role in the challenges we face. the group remains the ideological leader of a global extremist movement. it continues to influence the extremist group public media statements. they have had several,

unsuccessful small-scale plots of the past few years, highlighting the ability to continue attack operations even under strain to sustain terrorist operations. since al qaeda's relocation to pakistan, it has increased local militant allies to expand its operations to include u.s. targets in the region and overseas. the times square bomber is a stark reminder that the taliban continues to threaten the united states. we face a much more that he is an the versify direct 10 years after 9/11. -- diversified threat 10 years after 9/11.

i will focus on the single most capable of feeling it, al qaeda in the arabian peninsula. yemen remains the regional base. their recent gains in yemen and the governing challenges they face are increasing our concern about aqap's ability to attack against the homeland. aqap is a determined enemy and it will just to achieve its goal. anwar al-awlaki is a major blow. it does the end the threat from aqap. we remain concerned about the group's intent to attack

targets and western -- and its ability to find like-minded western extremists. the evolution and the versification of the terrorist threats since 9/11 is the rise of home grown, violent extremists. these individuals are inspired by al qaeda's global extremist agenda. a key feature of this has been the development of the narrative that raises the big concerns for u.s.-based extremists. there is a blend of al qaeda inspiration, perceived bit in my station, and the glorification of past homegrown plotzing. they can plan attacks with no direction from associates in the united states or overseas. they have the ability to the

fans -- to a dance plotting with little or no warning. nctc has proven to be a vital element of the government-backed effort. i would like to mention a few ways nctc is contributing to that effort. it investigates all international terrorism issues. it spans geographic boundaries. it has a " catalog of terrorism reporting. the work force includes representatives across government, reflecting a wide range of blue -- of viewpoint. it created the pursuit group to develop and pursue terrorism threats. it terrorism cases are examined -- terrorism cases are examined

thoroughly. analysts' provide these leaders with insights they developed with operational agencies such as the fbi. indeed to implement important reform. we have improved our process and information sharing. the threat continues to be bald. -- to evolve. additionally, they have implemented several improvements to our information technology. a counterterrorism data layer is being developed to allow atlas to search so that they can correlate pairs of the information in a single environment. the center is the home of the injury -- itac-g./ it brings together the federal

and not federal law enforcement. and i dedicated to bridging the gap between intelligence agencies and local tribal partners. all of these things must be done to protect the wild -- done while protecting the civil liberties of the united states citizens. they recognize our efforts must continue to exemplify american values, that this is the right thing, and that it enhances our security. i would like to close today by defying the single most important resources. that is our people. nctc bolsters its efforts. our progress is dependent on developing our committee work force. i spent much of our -- by six

weeks meeting be with -- meeting be workforce. i would encourage members of the committee to visit to see some of these men and women when every commit. members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify today. or the ship, support, and suggestion have been valuable. we cannot guarantee success. we continue to strive to identify, examine, and this potential threats. we are committed to working with resolve. thank you. >> thank you, director. the chairman is going to reserve is time for questioning. >> thank both of you for being here and for what you did. i want to thank you for the board to attack that you uncovered when a woman was trying to purchase explosives.

this is an example of what you have been doing and how you have been doing this. people expect there will be more of that. i wanted to ask you one question related to the national security threats. then, i have a question for director olson. we talked about cyber security and all the threats and the high -- the hacking. there is a china ray -- a chinese sponsor company that is trying to pursue contracts with other companies in the united states that do business with the government. they are not directly contacting with the u.s. government. some of the rules that would normally apply do not apply. their companies would have access to secure military lines of supply, and also communications networks and that type of thing.

my question for you -- you are aware of that. what is there that might be able to be done along those lines to stop some of that from happening? they go to u.s. research centers to do top line of research for the u.s. military. we do not have any way to say to that research center, you cannot have that contract with this company. i am concerned about it. it is a continuing effort that has been going on for quite a long time. >> there is a process. when there is a person accompanied by a foreign entity, which i am sure you are familiar with the best -- >> but that does not cover it.

how are you out reaching to some of these communities that we know some of the radical people have come from? what kind of plans -- are you working with the u.s. government departments to do a serious outreach program to try to reach some of these people before they become radicalized? >> yes. we are, along with the fbi and the department of homeland security and the number of other agencies. we are actively about in doing exactly what you suggest, which is working to understand the radicalization message al qaeda without and to help communities adjust that in their own communities. as well as to train local, state, law enforcement to better

spot the size of radicalization. the white house issued a strategy paper in august on violent extremism. >> it did not have a lot of follow-up. there was not a lot of detail. >> one of our responsibilities is to help the national security staff at the white house put together an implementation. to implement that strategy. our director of strategic of risch the planning at irresponsibility for the government approach -- director of strategic planning has the responsibility for the government approach. we spent an hour talking about how our combined effort in this area. >> i appreciate what you do. at some point, i would like to get an update on that, as far as

where it stands and what you are doing. >> everyone in our ages has been effective be going out to the community to establish and maintain the nation's sixth. over 10 years, we have been doing this. it is part of the special agent in charge to do this. there has been an extensive outreach effort and french ships developed. many of the leads that come in from the cases we have disrupted come from the moslem -- muslim american community. we all the men that with assistance academies. we bring in leaders from the various communities for a series of sessions where they learn about the public -- we augment that with assistance academies. i appreciate what you do.

thank you. yield back . >> director, there are two issues. i want to make a comment. since 9/11, the fbi has come a long way in dealing with terrorism. you are the the law enforcement agency to deal with terrorism. you created the national security branch. the culture of the fbi was are arrests, and best it, and dick. arrest and convict. i want to complement the jttf. the two questions that i have. number one, we know it was positive in bringing anwar al- awlaki to justice.

and message is out that you are going to kill and attack americans and we appointed find you and bring you to justice. the tactics were basically to recruit through a magazine and the internet, individuals who dislike our country. they are extremists who want to attack us knowing that the attacks are difficult for al qaeda. our intelligence has gotten to be so good that hopefully we would be able to pick it up. the question is, what do you feel of the home run threats? how are you dealing with its? director, human to in your a statement how important was to protect the liberty of our citizens. we have created a great system of government checks and balances. whether you are philosophically right, left, or moderate, we are all americans and we must follow

the law. what are you doing in your process? what are you doing in your training? how are we making sure we are following the constitution? our role in congress is to oversee that. if you could answer those the to questions, i would appreciate it. >> i talked about the growth of the bureau. we have talked about being an intelligence entity and being a way to disseminate intelligence. we have several hundred officers that we never had before september of lebron. we have 900 jttf personnel. many of them are state and local law enforcement. not sestet -- not necessarily from the dissemination

perception, looking at joint terrorism task forces brings state and local law-enforcement together with federal law enforcement. that is essential in identifying those who have been radicalized in the united states. talking about anwar al-awlaki and the threat he still opposes, he was behind the recruiting of personnel who could undertake a tax in the united states. is death has put a dent in that capability. aqap still has the capability to develop ied's. they still will have a problem finding people to put them on and get on planes. there is a balance between effective intelligence and law- enforcement activities on the one hand and civil liberties and

privacy on the other hand. every day, i keep in mind that balance. over the years, we have been successful in maintaining the appropriate balance between the two. we are guided by the constitution statutes. the attorney general guidelines, inspection and general oversight and congressional oversight. -- inspector general oversight and congressional oversight. >> we had some antiquated laws that did not focus on terrorism. we need the administration to come up with laws that it where we are moving to make sure we follow the law. >> to follow up on the comments with respect to homegrown terrorism. that is the greatest challenge we face in terms of seeing the rise up individuals in the united states who may be inspired and don't travel and do

not necessarily, on the radar screen of the intelligence capabilities you identified in your question. our greatest effort in that regard is helping to enable and empower state and locals, who are in the best position to identify individuals who have been radicalized. dell (communities and identify those individuals -- to help empower communities have to be a part of our strategy as well. as director mahler said, is a multi-layered approach. we operate under the constitution and federal statutes that apply to privacy as well as the handling of information. in addition to those, we have

executive branch processes, attorney general, inspector general, and in the third is congress. we have a civil liberties officer and we have training for our officers at nctc. it is a constantly evolving situation and we need to think about how we're going to address civil liberties as we continue to integrate information and share that with the right people. >> we have a vote under way, but we will push on. we will have this one and two, so if you would return right after this second vote when there is a motion to recommit and another 15 minutes vote, we will have a good blocked to focus in this could give us 10 minutes at recess and we would get well appreciate that. with that, i will turn it to mr.

king. >> director, and want to thank you for the information you provided as over the weekend. prior to al-awlaki's death, there was information about a link-up between aqap and our share ball. -- and al shabaab. the see that being strengthened, disrupted, or delayed it? >> that remains a significant concern. the potential line between shabaab and awap, -- aqap, the ability to recruit from the united states. that will not be significantly affected by the death.

that would be my answer. >> we were doing work on al- awlaki's work prior of 9/11. i sent a letter to air colder asking for any letters, communications, whenever comment -- whenever, prior to 9/11. in four months we have gotten no response from the attorney al-ral -- i'm sorry -- with awlaki when he was here in the united states. dealings are government may have had with him, conversations, communications, and we got no response at all. we dealt with the fed and got no response. it has been over four months. do i have any reason to believe we are not going to get the information involving the fbi's

dealing with al-awlaki? >> i will go back and check to what happened in respect to that letter. without looking at it, but being somewhat familiar with the circumstances of 9/11 and al- awlaki, but i do not believe there was content prior to 9/11, but i would have to check and give you a definitive response in response to your letter. >> i believe the fbi did an investigation of him. basically it was about what contacts he had prior to 9/11 and what we had prior to. i think he was even invited to the pentagon to give a discussion on moderate islam and

have that contrasts to what we know about him at the time. >> thank you both for the work you do in please pass that on to all the great men and women that work for you. i am concerned about the sharing of information between your departments and local first responders. i have heard from my local people that the sharing of information coming down has gone from next to nothing before 9/11 steadily improving to in some cases, more than they can possibly take in. they tell me that the fusion centers have helped a lot. i am interested in making sure that the right people up the local level that the right information and also that when first responders see something

out on the ground that they are able to get it to the appropriate people in the most efficient and effective way. i would like to know what sort of matrix we have established for assessing that. >> of the joint terrorism task forces, as you know, they have state and local law enforcement on the task force's and we are given top-secret clearance as an agent on that task force and from that perspective, the information moves to that entity and also through the fusion center. their 72 fusion centers and we have more than 100 personnel at these centers and particularly in the larger centers, when something comes to the center or has some relationship to terrorism, it will quite often come to the joint terrorism task

force. i will also say that it has been our practice since september 11th, when there is a threat on a particular city, town, or community, it is our belief that the persons responsible for the safety of a community have to have access to that information even if they do not have personnel on the joint terrorism task force. you'll find we will pass that and formation out to those response will for the save the whether it be a mayor or gone are, the first responders, or the police department so we're all on the same page. there are various levels of engagement that have improved, but there's still work to be done. >> and the information coming out. >> we have the hundreds of thousands of police officers around the u.s. and a number of police departments and sheriff's office's.

since september 11th, some of them have had technological improvements. i believe we do a much better job of informing people as to the context of what is happening and we also alert them to pass the information up even though it seems inconsequential to them. many of the cases have been made for people who have been particularly vigilant and have brought something to our attention. that usually comes to the joint terrorism task force or other means of state and local law- enforcement passing on. >> thank you. >> if i may briefly in in in a little cold perspective, one of the things we have is the organization that i mentioned briefly which is comprised of state and local police and first responders whose sole mission is to have all the access in terms

of clarence and they view the our intelligence at a top-secret level out and look at it from the perspective of the state and local police and first responder offices and ride it in a widowed make the most sense of our that community in a way that they can then use. in addition, when the things i mention from an analytical perspective, they work closely as well as our efforts to work with the fbi in pushing out .oint intelligence bulletin's the information coming to us, we largely get it domestically from the fbi and we have dozens of analysts and some agents who are providing interaction with information, as well as other dhs analysts.

>> we are under the five-minute mark so i will recess. we will recess and that we will shoot for 10 minutes. the start of the second vote, i would ask members to return and we will have a good block of time to resume questioning. excuse me, third vote. with that, a recess with the call of the chair. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011]

>> i called the committee to order. we have some constraints on the clock. they are in the motion to recommit and i will turn to mr. hack for questions. >> thank you to both of the directors for their time here this morning and being so flexible as we move back and forth to the floor. i appreciate all you have done to make our nation's safer. i would like for each of you to say what you think was the single greatest unable of that progress. what was the single greatest obstacle to future success?

in terms of addressing the agency's, various intelligence agencies overseas, the first line of defense, and as all absolutely essential in protecting the threat of the homeland. there are several factors that broke down the laws between the intelligence community and allowed us to sharron formation in ways they have not been allowed to do so prior to september 11th. also, a breakdown of the cultural differences in the opening up of exchange of the personnel as well as intelligence so that we had a worldwide view except a

truncated view. domestically, the joint terrorism task force's and the coming together of state, local, federal law-enforcement and intelligence agencies to be able to very quickly pursue any lead in any community in the united states as soon as we had a lead. >> the last piece of the question would be what impediment would be to future success. i would say as we go into a world dominated by cyber that the statutes, laws, capabilities are still back in the era where we're talking about telephones as well as the types of attractive vices that we have today. as the patriot act broke up the various stovepipe entities in

the future, we're going to have to adapt to a technologically proficient universe in which they can freely across borders and statutes and the laws do not give us the capabilities to reflect that expeditiously. >> the greatest unable has been a, as the director mentioned is the team approach to counter terrorism. there's a recognition that every effort to combat terrorism has to be approached by all the agencies, federal agencies as well as state and local agencies together as a team. you see that with the amazing efforts of the cia, the great efforts of the department of homeland security, the dod, and and it is a part of that, where the effort can come together analytically to integrate information that is collected across the divide.

it is really a process and we're thinking about ways of being the greatest enablers. in terms of the challenge. the threat has been in the group's affiliated organizations without qaeda that have proved very adaptive. as that threat evolves, is that the law tends to lag behind the threat. >> we recently had to reauthorize three of the more

controversial versions, the wiretapping, a lone wolf, and business. how critical are those in doing your job? >> 215, the ability to obtain records where it gives us access to obtain the records necessary to paint a picture of the potential terrorists, and the roving wiretaps we have had for any number of years. in this day and age where you can dispose of cell phones and sim cards in a number of minutes, it is essential to be able to move to a new number as opposed to have to draft another application. the roving wiretaps is important. when the greatest concerns now are the lone wolves.

we have not have had to use that in the past. my expectation is that we will need in the future. we need to utilize these to be instrumental. >> thank you, mr. chairman. director mueller, i'm going to raise issues of human rights but i want to of knowledge sensitivity and courage in saying that the fbi would not participate in terrorist interrogation techniques. 27 civil-rights and human rights groups wrote newsletter about dealing with the muslim community and tom brown terrorism.

there was a bureau training in quantico, and counter-terrorism agents were shown a chart, the you have probably seen, but it talked about an increased religiocity became less violent as people of the jewish faith for christians got more religious -- or christians got more religious. the more religious the people who support the karan get, the more violent they are. that was the training that went on there. i understand that there has been training where the prophet muhammed has action been called a cult leader and the islamic practice of giving charity is no more than a funding terrorism for combat.

you have said that this is an aberration, but who was watching the store? in a senate committee on homeland security, joe lieberman and susan collins said it "lacks meaningful standards to prevent anti-islamist material from seeking into counter-terrorism." my concern is that we are not looking at criminal or violent behavior but we're focusing on religious practices and that this is evident, and i can cite other evidence, of training materials, written materials of the fbi that describe people that where muslim clothing etc. giving it signals that they may be violent. i would like you to comment on this. this is something that we need to worry about in this country, the values, and the religious freedom to practice them.

>> it is a very valid concern. this is a very unusual occasion and in this particular instance, the individual gave the training and reports of what had been in that training, it came up from the students and we took action to assure that inappropriate, offensive content was not provided to others. there have been other instances that may include what could be perceived as offensive content. we have undertaken a review of from top to bottom of our counterterrorism training. these are isolated incidents and in the course of that review, we have reached out to others to assist as sallie reviewing the materials and to make sure that the offensive content does not appear. we have 34,000 employees.

we do a great deal of training. we understand the sensitivity and the importance of ensuring that the training we give to our persons are i believe these were unusual circumstances, but we're doing everything we can to do a top to bottom review of that training. >> i appreciate that, [unintelligible] [inaudible] increased activity in pro-muslim group, proselytizes in. if you change the word "muslim"

to "born-again christian," you could find the same kind of activities. this seems to be central to what fbi agents are to look for as suspicious and perhaps radicle, dangerous, violent behavior. as this been taken out of the activities of the fbi and its training? >> i am not certain what paper you were looking at. when it comes to assuring we have the appropriate training, as i said, where the gang at all of our training materials and we are asking people outside to make sure we are on the right track. we have an obligation to try and identify a future threats to the united states. it should not be based on religion or religious characteristics, but we have an obligation to identify and those particular characteristics that may give us a warning as to a person that will undertake an

attack against the united states. it is not necessarily on the new terrorism side alone. we of militants within the united states. -- we have militance. there is a certain amount of investigation that has to be done to enable us to identify those persons who would undertake attacks against the u.s., but we want to ensure that we do that in such a way that is consistent with our values. >> it would be counterproductive of the muslim community, which has been there, and i thank you for that investigation, and i would like to see the results of that when you have completed it. >> you allude to the fact that are out reach over the years has been very successful in bridging the relationships with the muslim american community and

this is something that is unfortunate and we have addressed it. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you for being here and for your testimony, and for your great service to our country. director mueller, let me start with you. i also sit on the armed services committee and i frequently hear conflicting views of the threats we currently face in their severity and by the leaders who testified before us. for example, former chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, adm. mullen, call their national debt the greatest threat. director, after 10 years on the job, i am curious to hear your thoughts on this matter and in

your opinion, one of the brett -- greatest threats facing our homeland today? >> i believe the greatest threat is from terrorist activity, domestic and international, with the potential of weapons of mass destruction falling into the hands of terrorists. secondly, the cyber world in which we are becoming accustomed gives a rise to any number of threats to our infrastructure, banking system, economic capabilities that we're going to have to focus on in the next 5-10 years. for the fbi, that means building the expertise and capabilities, working on establishing partnerships with others in the intelligence and law-enforcement communities to address what i would see as an increasing level of a threat in the cyber arena.

>> i appreciate that. i have spent a lot of time on the issue of cyber security and i would have to concur on that being one of the biggest threats that we face. several members share my concern. we have chaired a task force on the cyber terrorism review for the republican caucus. i know he shares that concern. thank you for that. in terms of the stovepipe. and information sharing hurdle that we have had to overcome, are you satisfied with where we are and that we are now able to connect the dots? this is for both of you, if you

would both take a crack in answering that question. i know it was a huge problem and a hurdle particularly around 9/11 where we tried to reduce the barriers, but are we confident that the intelligence we gather really gets to the right places in a timely fashion? >> i think we have made substantial strides in that regard. the nctc is one of the major players in there. we have more than 40 individuals there with access to all the information in the fbi with regards to terrorism. the nctc, the patriot act, and a number of steps have been taken to remove the walls between us have been very beneficial. what we face now, and we are all wrestling with this, is the ability to do federated searches across various databases and

agencies to be able to bring together disbursed pieces of information in a way that paints a picture. yet many agencies in a large countries such as ours that have a particular responsibilities which leads to the collection of information and particularized databases. make still pushing to certain things internal, and then we have to continue to grow our capability across the agencies to do that kind of federated search. >> we have made huge strides and information sharing. nctc as an example of that. we of information collected overseas and domestically by various agencies and it is all brought together an integrated at nctc by analysts working together. the challenge really remains that we are collecting more and

more information, but how do make sense of that information's? you need to make sense of the analytical tools. some of that is technology and taking advantage of those connections. we stood up one group to really help fill in the gaps comment on numbers, e-mail addresses, to help us identify those individuals. certainly there are legal changes that have been made, the patriot act and others. some of the easier changes have been made with challenges down the road. it is a work in progress. >> my time has expired, but thank you. one of the reasons i wanted to

serve on the intelligence committee and why i have an appreciation for the work that you do is that it is a great force multiplier. we know who the bad guys are and we know where to target our resources to be the most effective. thank you for what you do. i yield back. >> saved by the bell. a couple of quick questions, if i may. you mentioned cyber. in your estimation, our nation states engaged in cyber espionage against the united states? >> absolutely. >> who would you assess as the two biggest and actors engaged in espionage against the united states? >> it would be hard to pick out. it has been raised in other hearings, but countries such as russia and china, iran perhaps, that we of capabilities we are alerted to.

>> is not the fbi's belief that china in gauges in economic espionage? partner in commercial data for infiltration? >> since 2006, we have had several cases and investigations, prosecutions of individuals related to china on who have undertaken economic espionage, infiltration of information, and the like. >> in the essence of time, i could follow up on that all day. you and i have had a conversation about the prospect of a "going dark." can you talk about that for a minute and how important it is to move forward, not only on counterterrorism but counter- espionage as well, as well as criminal? >> because of the growth in mechanisms for communicating, whether it be an iphone, a droid, or what have you come to

the capabilities that are not covered by just a communications carrier, we have where we get an order from a court directing some kind of carrier of communications to provide information to us. often the carriers today, whether it be an email, text, or what have you come on do not have the capability to be responsive to those court orders. we need to look at the mechanisms to ensure that when a court issues an order directing that conversations or communications be collected by the carrier and turned over to the federal government that there is the capability by that carrier to be responsive. that is what we're looking at. >> i understand there is proposed legislation floating around that maybe will be proposed to congress? >> possible legislation to address this, yes. >> we look forward to getting

that. do you know a time when that gets quite severe for our ability, as the government come to collect on criminals and their espionage efforts here? >> it is certainly an issue today, but it is a growing issue given the diverse ways of communicating, new capabilities and devices out there. it has become much more of an issue than it was, say, five years ago. >> it is not the fbi's perspective to target someone based on race, religion, and that is nothing that i have seen. >> there has to be accreditation apart from first amendment protected activities. >> but they do engage in what i would call it criminal profile. you can have elements of several things and one or more may be on or off the list. part of the criminal profile would target is based on credible evidence.

is that correct? >> yes. >> talk about the challenge quickly, as we run out of time, from going purely law enforcement to intelligence. there were bumps along the way, but can you just talk about that? this has been the biggest challenge for the fbi to shift gears from purely investigative to also providing this intelligence aspect to its mission. if you could talk about that, i would be grateful. >> the fbi does four things very well. it develops sources and witnesses. it does wires in terms of interceptions. it does surveillance. but it does forensics. that has been for the purpose of putting a person before the court of law. the recognition that our responsibility is to prevent terrorist attacks meant that we had to develop an intelligent

capacity that utilizes these tools that we have had for 100 years, understanding that collecting those facts should not be looked at to the prism of being admissible in court room, and collecting it and understanding that pieces of information had to be put together from the nsa, cia, and others to paint a picture of individuals that want to attack the united states. a broader understanding of our role in the community and the responsibility to disseminate to mothers that which we have collected was a growth process. fbi agents have always responded and adapted to the change in responsibilities in missions. in world war ii, we were a counterintelligence organization in south america comes of this is not alien to the bureau as a whole, but it did take some adjustment after

9/11 to understand our mission has shifted somewhat. the same abilities we used before had to expand to address this mission. and i have done so. >> lastly, you mention thiran. is there anything to dissuade the bureau from believing that iran is still probably aggressively pursuing a nation that has state-sponsored terrorism? >> no. >> one more time for the record? >> no. >> one is the issue of your resources. we are in a difficult time for budget, but we need to protect the citizens. the other issue is homeland security and fbi. i would like for you to get with

secretary impala tunnel and were you feel there is a duplication of effort and refilled it could save money in that regard. >> let me put in a plug for the budget. >> we know that you need resources. >> in the house bill that passed, you are fine. >> and you prefer the house position? >> you should not, but you may want to. >> we can talk offline. >> i will take that as a tentative yes. thank you for your service, mr. director, and to the men and women who serve in both deeper organizations. this meeting is adjourned. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011]

>> the look at our prime-time schedules. at a, come c-span's series "the contenders" looking at the life and career of charles evans hughes, the governor of new york before running for president and losing to woodrow wilson. on c-span2, remarks from rick perry on the economy, health care come and border control. at 7:00 p.m. eastern on c-span3, former labor secretary robert reich talking about grass-roots organizing and the progressive movement. all tonight on the c-span television networks. tomorrow, on "washington journal,"."

director of the campaign for america's future previewing the expected vote in the senate on president obama is a jobs bill. tom mcclusky about the values voters summit. discussing the a, affordable modification program in the emergency homeowner loan program. "washington journal" live at 7:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. >> find new books for your call reading list this weekend on "booktv." president james garfield is near death, mortally wounded two months earlier by a crazed gunman. on the political intrigue and "destiny of the republic." aclu blaming the patriot act and other anti-terrorism loss for damaging the lives and liberties of american citizens. but she's interviewed by former

bush assistant attorney general. and a message for today's youth. life and liberty are worth fighting for. find the "bookstv" schedules online at booktv.org. >> it you think that a bill of rights is what sets us apart, you're crazy. every banana republic in the world has a bill of rights. every president for life as a bill of rights. the bill of rights of the former evil empire come the u.s.s.r., was much better than ours. i mean it literally. it was much better. we guarantee freedom of speech and press, big deal. the they guarantee is three demonstrations, protests, and anyone caught trying to suppress criticism of the government will be called to account. that is wonderful stuff.

of course, just words on paper. >> justices antonin scalia and justice breyer before the judiciary committee on a wide range of questions including the role of judges under the constitution. watch the rest of the discussion on line in d.c.'s ban video library, archives, and -- c-span video library. >> earlier today, president obama honored the chicago bears out the white house. their trip to washington was originally postponed due to the space shuttle challenger explosion days after the super bowl. at this south along event, former coach mike ditka presents the president with a personalized bears jersey. >> congratulations.

everybody have a seat. this is as much fun as i will have as president of the united states. this is a perk of the job. ladies and gentleman, the greatest team in nfl history since 1985, the chicago bears. [applause] i know that may get me into trouble in some cities that i visit, but i believe it is the truth. critics say i am only posting them because the green bay packers were here a few months

ago and i do not want to be outdone. as it turns out, but after this team won the super bowl they never had a chance to celebrate here at the white house. the day after super bowl xx, 500,000 chicago when is it turned out to welcome them back from the marlins. sadly, the day after that, we endured a national tragedy as the spaceship challenger exploded shortly after liftoff. the moment for the bears to visit the white house was postponed and the years went by. shortly after i took office, someone in the nfl realize there was a bears fan in the white house. they called my staff and asked if we could make this happen. today, i am proud to say to the players, coaches come and the

staff of the 1985 bears, "welcome to the white house for this well deserved and long overdue recognition." [applause] as i was mentioning as i was visiting with the players and coaches out back that in 1985 i had just moved to chicago. unlike most in chicago, i did not really know what it was like to be suffering sports fan. there are a few members of congress and big bears fans here from illinois to know what it was like. none of us who had ever seen what happened that fall. no one had seen anything like it. the city was invigorated and brought together by this team.

this team ruled the city. it riveted the country. they were everywhere. they were like the beatles, and this was before "sportscenter" and 24/7 sports news took off. we loved this team. everyone in chicago knew all these guys names. we even knew the names of the offensive linemen. you know offensive linemen. they do not get enough love. they got their own poster, the black and bruise brothers. what made this team so captivating was not just that they won, that they dominated, but the way they did it. yes, they were punishing and dominant, but they also had a

lot of fun. you could tell they enjoyed playing together. they were led by coach and hall of famer mike ditka. [applause] in training camp he said, "put a chip on your shoulder in july and keep it there until january." some of you may remember back in 2004 people trying to draft ditka to run against me. i will admit that i was a little worried because he does not lose. coach, i am glad you did not run because i have to say i would have been terrible on espn. [laughter] [applause] in a sign that anything is possible, even in washington,

coach and it cut and buddy ryan are here together. -- coach ditka and buddy ryan are here. coach ryan's 46 defense changed football forever. no one knew what to do with it. with the talent he had of the defense of side of the ball, there was nothing any of the teams could do about it. there are guys who hit and guys who hit. mike singletary, otis wilbur, otis hampton, richard dent, the super bowl mvp, a guy i used to work out with in the gym who made me feel week. -- feel weak. this is the defense that set the standard and it is still the standard. coach ryan give all these tips

to his sons that are now coaching and he should have passed on wisdom to us. more than 25 years later, the standard against all other teams are compared is coach ryan's defense. these guys lived to wreak havoc. it was like there were competing with each other to get to the quarterback or running back first. there was one game in which the other team had the ball in bears territory a total of 21 seconds. this was also the second-ranked offense in the league that season. jim mcmahon -- where is jim? [applause] we will not let him have the

mic. i will just say nice things about you. jim played quarterback with no fear and lived with a very few rules. there rock-and-roll quarterback who was on the cover of a "rolling stone" who had kids wearing shades and headbands to school. he gave me one. willie golf may have been the fastest man in the fuss about -- in football. there was some and we all revered which was walter payton. [applause] 12 years after we lost him to cancer, chicago still loves

sweetnees. -- sweetness. after he high stepped and left his way past jim brown's record, he held the record for 18 years. he was one of the best blocking backs ever. sometimes hitting them so hard he would knock them out of the game. we are grateful that his wife connie is here with us. [applause] we also tragically lost dave do worsen this year -- dave this year, lessons with his struggle and the kind of injuries those hits could have caused, and we are former -- and we are grateful that his former wife felicia is with us as well. . this team had nine pro-bowlers,

5 future hall of famers. they won 3 by a stretch of 104- 3. even though they were the youngest team in the nfl, these guys were so confident that kevin butler, still in the bears' all-time leading scorer, called his fiancee to change the wedding date because that was going to be the super bowl. there were so confident that the day after they lost the only game of the season there recorded the super bowl shuffle. there were suggesting that i should dance in the super bowl shuffle. i cannot do it. i do remember it. in chicago, you could not get away from the song that even if you wanted to.

it is safe to say it is the only team in nfl history with a gold record and a grammy nomination. [applause] this team changed everything for every team that came after it come on and off the field. they changed the laws of football. they were grinning, gutsy, hard- working, fun-loving, sort of like how chicago likes to think of itself. chicago has always been a die- hard football town, but they did something to our city that we have never gotten over. we love the bears. we want to days bears to come home to the white house with a championship as well. in the meantime, congratulations to all of you. thank you for helping to bring our city together. thank you for the incredible fun that you gave to all of us.

stick around, guys come and enjoy yourselves. do not break any thing and keep your eyes on this man. coach. [applause] >> on behalf of the 1985 chicago bears, we consider him one of us. we're very proud you honored us by bringing us out 26 years after the fact and five administrations, but thank you. [applause] >> thank you, so much. let's get a nice picture.

[applause]

♪ ♪

.

>> before the presidential

election of 1916, charlies evan hughes impact remained. serving as a postwar secretary of state and chief justice of the u.s. he is one of 14 men featured an "the contenders." friday at 8:00 p.m. eastern. for a preview, watch a number of videos about him at our special websitec-span .org/thecontenders. but tomorrow, if vote in the senate on the jobs bill. tom mcclusky talks about the voter summit being held in washington. lorraine woellert discusses the

home modification program and the emergency home owners loan program. "wahington journal" at 7:00 eastern on c-span. >> i would like to start by saying unequivocally that i.t. 9 each and every allegation against me today. >> what i ran for president, i said we would cut the deficit in four years, we've cut it by 50%. >> the people and defense that document the american story. this weekend, a look at the 1990's. the 15th anniversary of the 1996 presidential race between president bill clinton and bob dole. look for the complete weekend schedule that c-

span.org/history. >> watch more video of the candidates appeared to reporters are saying and attract the latest contributions with c- span's website for the campaign. it helps to update the landscape. links to c-span media partners in the early caucus states. all at c-span.org/campaign2012. >> earlier today, the white house continue to press republicans to get behind the jobs plan. the unemployment rate remained at 9.1%. the rate has stayed at 9% for over two years. reporters also questioned the press secretary about the millionaire tax that democrats are proposing and u.s. policy in afghanistan. this is 50 minutes.

>> with that, i don't have any announcements to make so i will get right to your rapid-fire questions and we will move quickly on this gorgeous friday through the briefing. thank you for being here. >> is that meeting still going on? >> the just ended moments ago. i don't have a broad reach out for you. it was a good meeting with senators reid, durban, and schumer. they discussed the american jobs act, the plants the leadership has to move forward on that with a vote next week. >> do you get a sense of whether the goal of that meeting was to dig into how the democrats will get this passed?

the president looking for assurances that the millionaire tax would get the votes needed? >> i don't want to get into too much detail about the meeting. i will say they did focus on the american jobs act. the president is pleased with the fact that the senate will take it up. we are absolutely confident that the overwhelming majority of democrats will vote on the act. if they get a chance to vote on it in the house, what will be surprising if this comes to pass is that so few republicans will vote for it in spite of the fact that everything in it -- every provision in it is the kind of thing republicans as well as democrats have supported in the past and it is entirely paid for so it will not add to the deficit. it is demanding quite clearly

that washington take clearly on its number one priority, on the people oppose the number one priority to do something about the e economy and get a growing and to get hiring accelerated. >> you did not mention -- >> she was not here. she could not make it. >> the president said yesterday in the news conference at the jobs act was an insurance policy against a double-dip recession. i want to follow up on that. is the white house genuinely concerned at this point that the economy is heading to a double- dip recession? >> we do not believe that it will happen, but there is no question that the e economy hasn't slowed, growth has slowed, and job creation has slowed. employment is still too weak. i think it is obvious to

everyone virtually that we need to take action to improve that situation. the american economy has faced a number of substantial headwinds this year as we have discussed which has affected forecasts and real job growth from what economists expected it would be this year prior to the arab spring, prior to the terrible earthquake and the tsunami and its impact in japan. prior to the situation in europe which has had an impact on the american economy. it is simply the smart thing to do to take action that is paid for that includes both investments to put construction workers back to work, teachers back to work, first responders back to work, and the tax cuts for every american who gets a pay check, for small businesses,

tax incentives for businesses to hire veterans. all these things make sense. outside economists had judged the package to be very beneficial to the economy if it were to pass. i think the president mentioned yesterday, it would be interesting to see what those outside economists would say about the republican job proposals such as it is that they put forward. i think many of you probably read in the paper today that the chairman of microeconomic advisers said that while the republicans have reasonable ideas, he believed that the proposals would have little immediate effect relative to a plan that stimulate aggregate demand. that is a plan like mr. obama is. the chief economist of moody's similar said that the republican proposals are generally good economic policy but they won't

mean much for the economy and job market in the next year. i know we said that -- again, you may agree entirely with what is contained within the so- called jobs plan. even if every idea within it is good, there is no doubt that those ideas don't have an impact on the economy today. everybody agrees, i think, that we need to take action to do something about the economy today. is the answer that washington should just wash its hands of the problems we are facing? should we do nothing? if so, explain why. that is the president's position. it is why he believes so firmly that congress needs to take action on the american jobs act. >> the unemployment rate has been about 9% 40 dead years or more. -- 9% for years or so.

>> economist should evaluate that. i will simply say it is not an acceptable level as far as this president is concerned. we are you urging from the worst recession since the great depression. a catastrophic job loss has occurred, the likes of which most people a lot today have never experienced. the hole created by that terrible recession is deep and we have climbed part of the way out of it, but we have further to go. that is why, and again, the president does not believe we can sit back and do nothing in the face of any economy that is not growing fast enough and the face as you say unemployment that is far too high. >> two questions, is the united

states changing its policy considering waxing -- collecting sanctions? >> i love to try to to the state department. i don't have anything on it. -- i will have to direct you to the state department. >> has the president talked about the republican field after the sarah palin and the governor of new jersey have decided not to run? >> not much. i am not going to stand up here and say that conversations like that don't ever happened, but the president is extremely focused on the business at hand which is that we needed to take action to grow our economy and put people back to work. that is his focus.

as he said yesterday, it really is kind of nutty to say, you are out there campaigning. as if there is something the strange about campaigning for a piece of legislation that would put people back to work. so, yes, he is going across the country to talk about things that is the very thing on people's mines. d think they think washington needs to do something about. he is saying if you think washington needs to take action, if you think the proposals that the president has put forward are the right ideas, then let your voice be heard in washington with your representatives and senators. that is what he is focused on. as he said yesterday, he would be elated if rather than doing nothing, congress was aggressive

about doing something on this immersed -- on this most urgent priority. >> he must have an eye on the potential candidates he will be running against next year. >> look, there are people who are working on that for him. he does not spend a lot of time thinking it out it. i promise you, i spend a lot of time with him and i know that for a fact. what we do know is that there will be a nominee from the other party chosen through its primaries and caucuses. when that happens, the nominee will be running against the president in the 2012 election. that is still quite a long time off from now. as we say about other things whether it is tsunami is,the arab spring, we focus here on the things we can control.

we need to take action on things we can control. how the primary process works out in the other party is not something we spend a lot of time on or think about it because it is not something we have any particular role in. >> thank you. you probably heard some of mitt romney's comments on foreign- policy among other things. he said the president has had three reckless years in policy. i wonder what your views on that are. also on afghanistan, he said he would undertake a complete review of policy, one that is forcing decisions that would be free of politics. >> i suppose he has to say something. the fact is, this president's brecher on foreign policy and

national security policy is excellent. i suppose that what might be interesting is if gov. mitt romney would be debating the highest republican in the land of his foreign policy, he said i have been very supportive of the president goes a policy in iraq and afghanistan. i think so for the president has done just fine. there has clearly been more done under president obama then there was under president bush in terms of a more aggressive effort. that was said by john boehner, the highest elected republican in the land. >> i want to ask you a question about mitt romney's comments as well. if he did not want america to be the strongest nation on earth, you have that president today.

if you could a dress the idea of the kind of things republicans are saying about the president, he does not believe in american exceptional dozen. >> again, they have to say something. it does not make any sense. from the moment barack obama became a national figure, it was based on the idea that america is the exceptional country around the world. that was the essence of the speech that he gave at the convention in 2004 that put him into the public consciousness. it is something he repeats all of the time. i hear him say often that this is the greatest country in the world. he believes that. he has lived it.

his record on foreign policy and national security policy speaks for itself. we are stronger, we are safer, we have taken the fight to our principal enemy with a level of aggression and success that is unprecedented. we have improved our relationships around the world with our allies and partners. we have made great strides engaging in in the far east with a specific region in a way that was neglected prior to this administration. i think we have every reason to be quite proud of the record that this president has in foreign policy and national security matters. >> another disappointing jobs report for the president. if the economy does not significantly improve by next year, can the president be reelected in does he deserve to be? >> first of all, i think the

jobs report was actually better than expected. as we have said and others have said this morning, it is far from good enough. no question. that is why we need to do something about the economy and job creation. that is why the president is out there every day talking about the need to pass the american jobs act. if others have good ideas that will help the economy grow and create jobs now as opposed to sometime in the future, then he wants to hear them. he is eager to have conversations about it. >> hasn't john boehner and eric cantor requested a meeting with the president? >> the president has met with them. i think any american who has watched this president did with members of congress of both parties during the time he has been in office understands well that he has made every effort to consult and negotiate with republicans in congress. he will continue to do that. the president has put forward a plan. again, it was designed with the

idea that it would be filled with things that traditionally have enjoyed bipartisan support. it is a plan that is paid for. it is not an issue of contributing to our deficit. he believes congress ought to act on that plan. republicans have put forward a plan. elements of that plan that the president believes are meritorious, he has supported and signed into law. he looks forward to signing a to free trade agreements as well as taa in the relatively near future. those are things that are important and he supports them. what he has not spared -- what we have not seen yet our job proposals that have an immediate impact on economic growth and jobs. the idea that deregulation is the answer to our economic woes is just unfounded as many economists and advisers of

president reagan and bush 41 made that clear based on the data and affirmation from the private sector just the other day. >> the question must -- >> did he get reelected? absolutely. here is why. the collection will be about whose vision is best. whose ideas for moving america forward our best. what we confidently believe is that the american people will see in president obama's vision for the future the right answers. we also believe is if the republican nominee once he or she emerges runs on the proposals i have been generated so far which are essentially beer damages of the policies that got us into this mess, the american people what to think that is the right answer. "we don't need to move forward is to reach back to implement the things that got us into this

mess. one perfect example that is moving right now in regard to the president was the nominee to be a consumer watchdog, to look out for consumers who have been in the past taken advantage of by financial institutions. there is an explicit determination to prevent the nomination from being approved and basically to roll back all of the wall street reforms this president fought hard to put into place. when a second, everybody knows that the worst financial crisis this country has seen occurred because of lax regulation. is that the argument that we should remove all of the protections that this legislation put into place precisely to prevent the kind of collapse that we had in 2007? to ensure that the tax funded bailouts that occurred last time

will never happened again? that should be removed? we are happy to have that debate. on the merits of that debate, the president will be reelected. then the millionaires' tax, president endorsed the yesterday. he is comfortable with it. those are kind of lukewarm at it is compared to other ones he could have used. why not a stronger endorsement? >> the president made clear from the beginning that how we pay for the american jobs act was something that could be decided by congress as long as it met his principles. the first principle being it had to be paid for. the alternative that the senate democratic leadership has put forward is fine with us. it's his principles. that is essential.

it pays for all of the provisions within the american jobs act. it is entirely consistent with where he has been from the beginning, and we look forward to the senate taking the bill up, debating a, and hopefully passing it exceeding the 60 votes threshold that has artificially been established for any vote in the senate. we believe these are the kind of ideas that republicans as well as democrats should support because they have supported them in the past. the senators who don't will have to explain, wait a second, don't you have teachers who have been thrown out of work? jim asked about the jobs report. absolutely -- not strong enough. not good enough. i think for the 19th straight month we have had private sector growth, now 2.6 million private sector jobs, a reality that has been true for many months is

that while the private sector has been growing, the public sector has been shrinking. once again, 34,000 jobs last month were lost in the public sector overwhelmingly in the education sector. that is a problem. who has a solution? the president. the american jobs act. if you are opposed to it, explain why. >> does is undermine his push in the future for the level it toward the line he has drawn? it does not under a -- it is not undermined that? >> a surtax is different from not renewing the bush era tax cuts -- >> drawing the line for -- >> again, i am telling you it does not the fact that. just like the buffet rule reform

tax reform, we hope it goes forward. if it does not, the president's position has always been that tax cuts for the wealthiest americans, those making over $250,000 are simply things we cannot afford. they are part of the reason we have the tremendous debt that we have. they should be allowed to expire. >> he represents a state where money does not go as far as it would go in other states. if you have a family in the new york city area, $250,000 there about, as the president think that that is a wealthy family? >> the president's position has not changed. it also happens that the public overwhelmingly supports that position. this only ensures that as we make choices because we do not

have unlimited resources that we make those choices in a way that is fair and balanced. we make sure everybody pays their fair share. i don't think members of the middle class out there are thinking that they somehow got a great deal on the last decade. do you know anybody -- they have seen their wages stagnate and decline, and this is prior to the last recession. do they think they had a great shape in the tax code? i don't think they have. the wealthiest americans have seen in their share of the national wealth increased a lot over the same. period. it is simply a matter of making sensible choices. if the choice on one hand is the you not do anything about the fact that all it around the country teachers are being laid off, or do you look at a

possibility of preventing that from happening to the american jobs at by asking the most fortunate among us to pay a little more to ensure that those teachers get back into the classroom, they are teaching our children which is a value in and of itself and a value that helps make america strong or in the future, i think most americans would side with helping those teachers. >> the pakistani doctor who aided the u.s. and the search for osama bin laden, is there an obligation? he could be charged with treason. are we doing anything to help him? is there an obligation? >> i don't have any info for the poor you. -- i do not have any info on that for you. >> last night senator we had a big dustup with senator mcconnell.

with 51 votes, you could potentially get a lot more done. as the white house think that is a good idea? >> i don't know the arcane details -- but i can tell you is that, yes, we think it is genuinely a problem that the filibuster has become a tool that is supplied so broadly to measures that normally required only a majority vote. that is an issue. that is the general principle. i do not -- you stop debate and want to add an amendment to that, i think that is the issue here that drove that. i only know what i have read about. >> president obama is an office, -- we don't foresee a

change in leadership in the senate. >> you just mentioned teachers being laid off. yesterday, i had a chance to meet a young man recently from massachusetts. he got three pink slips. he mentioned that we need to pass the jobs bill, put somebody like robert back in the classroom and teach our kids. "boston herald" had a story saying that they never met this man. >> i think he was as close to the president as you are to meet. the president knows his story. i would simply refer to the story where he said, people who want to fuss over the word choice are missing the point. it is about our investing in communities. yes, i did lose my position to times within four times in boston public schools. the question he posed as a

rhetorical question. the emphasis will cost -- the emphasis was people who are like me that are highly qualified but not working. it is indisputable as we found out this morning that all around the country teachers are being laid off. the president has a plan to solve that were to address that problem. >> when i use an example of somebody who does not have a job? >> the man has been laid off three times in four years. this is indicative of a problem. the fact that he got -- he was hired again after the fact happen to be the results of the kinds of assistance provided by this administration through the recovery act to ensure that teachers were hired back or were not laid off to begin with. i think the principle is just indisputable as he makes clear. >> eric cantor this morning said he is increasingly concerned about the growing bonds

occupying the wall street and other cities around the country. as the president share that concern? >> the president spoke to the occupy wall street movement yesterday. i sense a little hypocrisy down here. but we are seeing on the streets of new york is an expression of democracy. i think the remember mr. kantor -- mr. cantor describe protests by the tea party. i don't understand why one man's bob is another man's democracy. i think both are expressions that are totally consistent with the democratic tradition. >> today was the tenure anniversary of the war in afghanistan. with everything that has happened there and the seemingly endless supply of bad news with

the assassination attempts, elevated amounts of fighting, the conflict between president cars i and this government, what evidence can you point to that the search the president's policy is working? >> i would point you to the objectives that the president laid out when he put forward his policy -- his strategy on afghanistan. what was the primary objective? disrupt, dismantle, and ultimately the ft al qaeda by any standard including one i just quoted. the president has had success in the number one objective of his policy and strategy. the fact that the effort in afghanistan is difficult, that there are setbacks as well as successes is also not something

we would dispute. it is the truth. why our e enormously grateful that this president as i said the other day is profoundly grateful for the sacrifice and the patriotism and the remarkable skill of our men and women in uniform and what they have been able to do in afghanistan as well as iraq and elsewhere in the world. in addition to the number one objective that the president laid out, as you know, our approach was entirely a draft when the president came in. he decided we needed to dive deep, focus on what are true objectives needed to be, and pursue a policy that could achieve those objectives. that is what he is doing. part of the policy was to surge forces which he did and to begin to draw forces down which is what he is doing. as you know, by 2014 we will

draw that to the point where we can fully transitioned security lead over to afghan security forces and we continue to be on track to do that. >> british government review is going to say there is a significant risk of an afghanistan's civil war where a talent and takeover would be to withdraw in 2014. he has to say we are maybe 50% of where we need to go. if he were to be candid about the white house's position on where things are, would you concur that there is significant risk? >> i was enormously candid just moments ago. there are significant challenges in afghanistan. as we strive to meet the goals laid out by the president and part of that process was to make the goal clear and focused as opposed to a broad and unfocused which they had been in the past, we continue to work toward

achieving those goals. the principal goal was to disrupt, dismantle, and a defeat al qaeda. i don't think there is any dispute we have had some success in achieving that goal. there is still work to be done. it is also to prevent -- it continues to take control and to give us time to train up afghan national security forces which we are doing. that process is continuing. 2014 as you stated will hand over security leads to an afghan security forces. we hope and expect to continue to make progress toward our goal as we head toward 2014. this is not easy work. we have been absolutely candid about that fact. >> the afghan government is rampant with corruption.

you have some problems there also. >> if there were an absence of problems, we would not be focusing as much attention and resources on the issue. you are stating a totally legitimate question, but you have to acknowledge these are challenges. i think it is also important to acknowledge what the process this president went through when absolutely adhering to the promises he made during the campaign which is that we need to get our policy in afghanistan -- it was addressed, we needed to focus attention on afghanistan. we needed to focus what are objections were. the real orientation of our policy as we have ended the war

responsibly in iraq and focused on afghanistan has been entirely consistent with what the president said when he was running for office in 2007 and 2008. this is hard stuff and it continues to be difficult. the extraordinary sacrifice of our men and women in uniform as well as civilians in afghanistan is what makes such as possible. >> when do you not leave troops in iraq if you cannot solve the problem of that unity? >> i will refer you to what secretary of defence said on that. we are complying with an agreement made by the previous administration but honored by this one to withdraw all of our forces by the end of this year. we are on track to do that as this president has been committed to doing. what is true is that regardless of the discussion we are having now related to that issue, we will have a robust and serious relationship with iraq as we have with countries all around

the world. that is an important relationship that we intend to focus on beyond the end of this year. >> the president yesterday promised -- is there any priority order that he would like to see? >> that is like saying which one of your children do you like best? >> you can always split it up. >> i think they are all valuable. they all do what they are designed to do which is help the economy grow, help put people back to work -- there are more than two options here. we do not have a priority here. we obviously want the congress to take up a vote to pass the

entirety of the american jobs act. as we said from the beginning, not just yesterday when the president gave a press conference, if congress sends him a portion of it and as long as it is paid for in a way that meets the president was the principal, he will sign it into law and say, "where is the rest of the?" if they send us an expansion of the payroll tax cut for american workers for everybody, we will say, fantastic. this will help. i signed it into law. where is the rest of it? where is the provision that puts teachers back to work? where is the provision that puts construction workers on the job building roads and schools? where is the provision that gives incentives to businesses to hire veterans going back to the question earlier -- veterans returning from iraq and afghanistan. >> funny you should mention that one. that is the one where there is some school of thought we have

the best chance of getting through. >> i don't know how to successfully define the future in regard to the house of representatives. we believe that every element of this package should have broad, bipartisan support, the kind of things that have had broad bipartisan support in the past. if you are suggesting by your question that members of congress will be willing to at least we knew if not expand the payroll tax cut, and therefore have, and you know, 150 americans see their taxes go up next year, i think that would be surprising. it has been a year of surprises. >> politically, it has been considered of any of them, why

would people not support this and have it paid for by a surcharge on the wealthy. that would be one of the ones that perhaps -- >> what you are saying is what we have said treated pieces come up, we know the senate will vote on it and we hope it will pass. that is the american jobs act. if it does not -- if the bill in its entirety does not pass, we will certainly urge -- the president said yesterday that congress should take action on the tax incentives, tax cuts, putting teachers back to work, putting construction workers on the job, all of the elements of it until it is entirely done. he would like nothing more than being prevented from doing that because they acted on the nation's most urgent priority. >> the president earlier said

the united states ended the war from a position of strength. what does the united states intend to do with processing afghanistan from a position of strength? >> i would just go through some of the questions i got a few minutes ago. we had a strategy in afghanistan. it has met with significant successes. it meets with significant challenges. one thing we do support that is very important is an afghan lead process of reconciliation. alternately, reconciliation is essential for the prospect of peace in afghanistan. we support that process. we will continue to support it and believe it is necessary. going back to the answers i gave previously, there is no question that there is significant

challenges in afghanistan. there is also no question that we have had successes in meeting the goals the president set out when he announced his new strategy in afghanistan and pakistan last year. i mean, it is very similar to the answer i gave just a few minutes ago. >> according to many think tanks, the president said many times there cannot be peace and stability in afghanistan without cooperation from pakistan. yesterday, some elements -- he

did not say that. go ahead with your question. >> they are still killing americans and afghanistan and also indians and they are supporting al qaeda around the globe. where do we go from here. according to a poll in pakistan, the number one enemy and pakistan according to the people of pakistan -- is the president taking any steps -- >> i think he answered the question in great detail about pakistan yesterday in his long press conference. i don't expect -- i don't expect i will be able to improve on his answer. i will say as i have said all along. we have an important relationship with paki -- with

pakistan. the cooperation we have a pakistan is extremely important in terms of our national security objectives, protecting americans, taking the fight to al qaeda. that is why we continue to work with pakistani and try to build on that cooperation. we also make sure -- we also make clear that we have issues with pakistan at times it is a complicated relationship. the president answered that in his press conference. >> after talking to many think tank here, many economists are advising the president they can bring billions of dollars by a

having a legal state taxes like anything else? >> you know the president supports comprehensive immigration reform anything else. he hopes we will have bipartisan support that used to exist not many years ago. two of the leaders of comprehensive immigration reform or the pre it -- the previous president and the previous republican nominee john mccain. we hope and we continue to push for comprehensive immigration reform. >> does president obama believe that the 5% surtax would bring wealthy americans to fair stair -- fair share status in their taxes? >> the president believes there needs to be shared sacrifice as well as shared prosperity. as i said before, we have choices to make.

if we had unlimited resources, we could all take a vacation because some of these difficult choices would not have to be made. but they do. if we say that hundreds of thousands of teachers are being laid off around the country because the economic stress the states are under and localities are under and we want to do something about it because that is an important objective to put those individuals back to work and ensure our children are getting educated and helping build the fine -- the foundation of the future for this country, we have to figure out how we can make that happen. rather than say, depending on what your economic policy is, rather than say let's make senior citizens pay for it by turning the medicare program into a voucher system or let's/education spending or elsewhere, we believe that those

who have benefited the enormously in the last decade or so should pay a little bit more. it certainly constitutes more fairness to overall tax reform. >> with that complete fairness? what's again -- i am not going to project what may or may not happen once this provision -- rather the american jobs at with this provision attached to it takes effect. the president focuses on taking action we absolutely have to take to ensure that our economy grows significantly next year, to ensure that it creates jobs. there is no higher priority. then we have to say -- because we absolutely have to take action and we need to pay for it, how do we do that? the president believes as

evidenced by the proposal he put forward and the president -- the proposal the democrats put forward we need to do it in a fair way. >> you are not ruling out the idea that it might require additional taxes of this group of very wealthy americans? >> we are talking about apples and oranges here. i was asked earlier whether or not this changes the president's position on should the bush tax cuts for the wealthiest americans expire. the position has not changed. i think i can just point you to the president was a comprehensive debt proposal which includes a number of proposals that would increase revenue to help reduce the deficit and get a hold of our debt in a balanced and responsible way. revenue someone had and cuts on the other. i would point you to those to say if we are going to be

serious by our deficits and debt and measures have to be made on the revenue side. >> the president's meeting with the prime minister, they have elections coming up october 23. is there any level of concern in the u.s. that the path to democracy by kennedy railed -- might be derailed? >> this emboss a couple of first. he is the first leader of the arab spring to meet with the president. it is the first country to has gone through a transition because of the arab spring to be holding elections of note. the president very much looks forward to the meeting. if you are asking me generally speaking in the whole region, i think it has to be. this is significant change.

i cannot remember a month or so ago, six or eight weeks ago i was asked where things were moving slowly in the middle east. i said, with a second. things have happened in this nine month period that were unimaginable for years and years and years. there is a lot of change happening at once. we are very encouraged by the progress that has happened in tunisia. >> just a quick follow up. will he be announcing the endorsements -- >> i think we have made -- i think we may have more information that will be provided for you a little later. thank you very much. one day i will remember to read the week ahead. one friday. >> why is the president intervening to prevent the

enforcement of the new alabama emigration law? >> you say that like i -- i have not even been asked. the justice department is reviewing the decision to determine the next step on the specific case. generally, the president has been clear that efforts to address the issue of america's broken immigration system will only create more problems than it solves. >> the cc people fleeing the state? what i have not had the discussion with them. i would not like to characterize. i will just point you to the department of justice. you should ask him about it. president's principles on this have been stated and restated just moments ago by me. for the week of october 10,

2011, on monday, the president will travel to the walter reed medical center in washington d.c.. he will visit with would service members. on tuesday, the president will travel to pittsburgh, pennsylvania. the president will miss it the international brotherhood of electrical workers. during that time at the training center, the president will take a tour of the training facilities. he will convene a meeting of the president council of jobs competitiveness and deliver remarks. later in the day he will travel to orlando, florida. we have a regular policy where he comes in for remarks every time he has won. i don't know specifically about the event. >> the event at walter reed -- doesn't have a name? >> i don't know if the transition -- i will adjust

accordingly. he is visiting service members. on wednesday, the president will deliver remarks at the latino heritage forum being hosted by the white house and the u.s. department of the interior to celebrate the past and ongoing contributions of latinos who have helped shape american oppose the rich and diverse history. on thursday, the president and first lady will host president of the republic of korea. this will highlight the strong alliance and deep economic ties between the united states and the republic of korea.

the visit will also celebrate the strong bonds of friendship between the american and korean people. details about credit's schedule will be released as they become available. thank you very much. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] next -- live,"the contenders." in a moment, the life of charles evans hughes. evans hughes.